In this thesis, I highlight the crucial importance of placing Origen's theology within the correct polemical context. It has been common scholarly practice to interpret the works of Origen within the context of the Nicene Controversy. This leads to distortion and confusion. The correct interpretation of Origen depends upon a detailed understanding of the intellectual milieu in which he wrote. Origen's Christology, indeed his entire theology, is primarily apologetic. He has a specific set of doctrinal opponents, whose attitudes and beliefs shape and dictate his own theology. In the first chapter of this thesis, we discuss how Origen's engagement with pagan opponents led him to adopt their central doctrine of the deus absconditus and how Christ takes on the guise of a Middle-Platonic second God. We also see how Origen's main opponents within the Church were the Monarchians. It was in response to their extreme unitarianism that Origen was obliged to develop his famous doctrine of the three distinct divine otooiai. In chapter 2, we consider the controversial fragment preserved by Rufinus (Apology 2.9), in which Origen apparently describes the Father and the Son as 6 ioouoio< . By a careful examination of the original polemical context in which Origen wrote, namely the Monarchian controversy, we utterly reject the authenticity of this fragment. Consubstantiality was the distinguishing doctrine of the Monarchians as such, Origen could never have endorsed it. Rufinus has skewed the original version to suit an entirely different polemical context, namely the Nicene controversy. In chapter 3, we examine Origen's doctrine of the earthly life of Jesus Christ. Once again we see how polemic and apologetic are the main spur to the development of Origen's theology. It is in response to widespread pagan ridicule that Origen ignores the Saviour's human nature and presents Christ as wholly divine. Moreover, Origen's explanation of the mechanics of the Incarnation - exactly how it was possible for God to become man - reveals a similar awareness of traditional philosophical objections.

This thesis examines the ideas of love and kinship of early Christians in the first three centuries! Its principal aim is to map how Christian writers in this period employed the ideas to define points of difference between people: between themselves and their fellow Christians and between Christians and non-Christians. The central argument of the thesis is that the ideas functioned as boundary markers - but also to signal the absence of boundaries - in a hitherto unacknowledged variety of ways. This variety is illustrative of the malleability of the ideas, of their capacity to acquire new tinctures of meaning in different settings, and sheds fresh light on their role in shaping the character and development of the early Christian movement. The focus of discussion is on the evidence of materials which are commonly placed within the orthodox or proto-orthodox lineage of Christianity: it is among these materials that diversity of thought is least emphasised in existing scholarship. Special attention is given to the lexical meanings which attached to specific love and kinship words in the war of individual authors. Analysis of these meanings is used to uncover assumptions which illustrate, the structure of the authors' social thought. The conclusion of the thesis is that simple characterisations of how early Christians understood ideas of love and kinship to define their status as believers can no longer be considered adequate .The ideas were understood by some authors to demonstrate the openness of relations between Christians and non-Christians and the absence of significant differences or boundaries between them. For other authors, they demonstrated the opposite. Both outlooks, moreover, took a number of different forms an d both could even be present within the thought of a single author.

This dissertation is an investigation into Theophilus of Antioch's use of cosmological allegoresis of Greek myth in Ad Autofycum. It serves two purposes: (1) it contributes to our understanding of the mythological interpretation by Theophilus and the other second century Christian apologists, and (2) it concludes that the purpose for Theophilus' use of cosmological allegoresis of Greek myth is to portray Hellenistic cosmo-theological ideas as foils to those he associates with Scripture. The first chapter surveys previous research on Ad Autofycum, its apologetic argument and its use of mythology. The evidence for evaluating Theophilus' use of cosmological allegoresis is then examined in two parts: Part One establishes the historical context for the study in two chapters: Chapter two includes Graeco-Roman attitudes toward myth, advocates of 'barbarian' myth, cosmo- theological readers and the place of cosmological allegoresis; Chapter three surveys Jewish and Christian use of cosmological allegoresis and interpretations of Genesis in the doctrinal history of the ontological relationship of God and matter. Part Two assesses Theophilus' use of cosmological allegoresis in two chapters: chapter four shows how cosmological allegoresis fits his apologetic argument and examines his interpretations; Chapter five shows how Theophilus contrasts the myths and Scripture and portrays Autolycus as a cosmo-theological interpreter of myth. Finally, chapter six provides a general summary of the dissertation and its conclusions. This dissertation concludes that the purpose for Theophilus' use of cosmological allegoresis of Greek myth is to portray Hellenistic cosmo-theological ideas which serve as foils to those he associates with Scripture. It also explores several implications for current scholarship and provides a prospective for future study in this area.

No description available.

In this dissertation, I propose an alternative approach to applying postcolonial theory to early Christian texts than that presently operative in the field of Early Christian Studies. Current postcolonial methodologies, following a pattern established in the arena of Biblical criticism, focus on Homi Bhabha’s idea of mimicry as they seek to locate resistance to hegemonic exercises in early Christian texts. But mimicry analyses tend to lead to a reading of early Christian texts in which strikingly similar discourses receive very different treatments depending on whether the author is a pre-Constantinian Christian (thus occupying an analogously colonized position), or a post-Constantinian Christian (thus occupying the space of the colonizer). The discourses of the latter are criticized for their hegemonic operation, while the former are treated as resistors of hegemony, suggesting mimicry analysis only ever touches the person speaking, but not the speech itself. Bhabha has argued, however, that his thought is oriented towards intervention in discursive conditions of dominance, and he criticizes colonial resistors who adopt the discursive habits of the colonizer in resisting colonial subjugation. Thus, a postcolonial reading of early Christian texts, especially one predicated on Bhabha’s work, should not treat similarly dominant discourses differently based on who is speaking. Analyzing early Christian texts in light of what Bhabha calls transparency — the way particular and localized values become invisible (transparent) within discourses, masquerading as objective norms that justify hegemonic outcomes — allows for a more effective intervention in hegemonic aspects of early Christian discourses, especially where self-definition is concerned. A transparency analysis also allows us to unite two streams currently operating separately in early Christian studies: the problem of essentialism in Christian self-definition, and the question of whether race is an organizing principle in early Christian self-definition.

No description available.

The goal of this thesis is to demonstrate the presence of a fourth-century controversy surrounding the second-century Christian martyr Ignatius of Antioch. Scholars are well acquainted with the Ignatian controversy of the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries. This thesis will show that many years before there existed another controversy over Ignatius of Antioch. During the fourth century, representatives of both Nicene and non-Nicene Christologies sought to conscript Ignatius in order to defend their understanding of orthodox Christianity. I will expose this nasty fight via the narrative found in the next five chapters. In the opening chapter, I will marshal textual evidence that leads to the conclusion that the Ignatian middle recension is riddled with textual alterations introduced by proponents of Nicene Christology. In chapters two and three, I will argue that the Ignatian long recension represents a response to these Nicene alterations by a Non- Nicene individual or party that possessed a Christology compatible with the Ekthesis Macrostichos creed of Antioch 344. I will demonstrate that both the Ignatian long reension and the Macrostichos understand Jesus to be equal with God as well as subordinate to God. Chapter four will catalogue the embrace of Ignatius of Antioch by a variety of fourth-century Christian leaders, with a focus on the Nicene Athanasius of Alexandria and the non-Nicene Eusebius of Caesarea. The concluding chapter will direct attention to John Chrysostom‟s sermon In sanctum Ignatium martyrem. The evidence leads me to conclude that by the end of the fourth century Ignatius of Antioch had become such a controversial figure that Chrysostom felt the need to defend Ignatius‟ character before he could put forth Ignaitus as a model for Antiochene Chrisitans to emulate. There has been much scholarly work devoted to Ignatius of Antioch and there has been much scholarly work devoted to the Arian controversy. Until now, this personality and this controversy have not been brought together for close inspection.

This dissertation examines the ecclesiology of the early writers of the Apostolic Church in the United Kingdom, and seeks to build upon this largely neglected body of Pentecostal thought for the contrastive work of contemporary Pentecostal systematic theology. A particular emphasis is placed on the thought of D.P. Williams as the most significant Apostolic writer of the early years of the movement. Connections between Apostolic ecclesiology and the Pentecostal distinctive of the baptism in the Holy Spirit are examined, as well as the role of Trinitarian theology in early Apostolic ecclesiology. Attention is then given both to distinctive Apostolic themes, including the 5-fold ministry and the Eternal Purpose, as well as their approach to other ecclesiological doctrines including the Totus Christus and the Lord’s Supper, before moving on to a constructive synthesis.

L’Ancien Testament ne contient pas de terme équivalent à celui de foi. Sa conception de la foi est la réaction de l’homme devant Dieu. L’exégèse actuelle se demande si l’origine de foi chez Paul revêt une signification hébraïque ou grecque, ou si foi n’est pas un vocable chrétien. Cette thèse étudie ce chapitre central pour la conception de la foi. Paul écrit Romains pour résoudre la désunion entre croyants Juifs et croyants non juifs à Rome. Le premier chapitre valorise la compréhension de la foi paulinienne dans le débat actuel. Le deuxième chapitre examine la conception de la foi dans Rm 1-3 où la justice de Dieu ne peut être obtenue par la Loi mais seulement par la foi dans l’Evangile. La conséquence radicale du monothéisme juif, Dieu est un, est que Dieu est le Dieu de tous ; ce qui permet de résoudre le conflit entre Juifs et non juifs croyants en réinterprétant l’identité chrétienne. Le troisième chapitre est l’étude exégétique de ce chapitre exclusivement théologique. Qu’a trouvé Abraham selon la chair ? Il a trouvé la justice avant d’être circoncis, justice associée à une promesse de descendance. En conclusion : la conception paulinienne de la foi et celle de l’Ancien Testament sont équivalentes : seul le Dieu unique justifie mais la conception paulinienne fait référence au Christ ; Paul revisite le récit sur Abraham à la lumière de sa foi au seul Dieu, et non plus par sa justification par les oeuvres. Paul, à la lumière de l’événement Christ, considère Abraham comme l’ancêtre de tous les croyants. Il donne une identité à la communauté naissante et l’appelle à l’union (Rm 15, 5) dans la foi ; le Dieu unique est maintenant identifié par son action en Jésus Christ. / There is no equivalent word that covers the meaning of faith in the Old Testament. It is the reaction of man to the action of God. Current exegesis has analyzed the background of faith in Paul to see if it has a Hebraic or Greek meaning or is a new word of Christianity. The dissertation studies this decisive chapter. Paul wrote Romans to end the conflict between two rival communities in Rome: Jewish believers and non-Jewish believers. The first chapter studies the Pauline interpretation of faith in the current debate. The second chapter deals with the faith concept in Rom 1-3. Paul states that God’s justice cannot be obtained by the Law but only by faith in God’s salvific power in Christ. According to Jewish monotheism, the radical consequence is that God is the God of Jews and non-Jews. To say that God is one enables Paul to solve the conflict between Jews and non-Jews by a new interpretation of Christian identity. The third chapter is the exegetical study of the most theological chapter. What has Abraham found according to the flesh? He has found justice before circumcision, a justice linked to the promise of an offspring. To conclude: the Pauline conception of faith and the Old Testament conception are similar: God alone justifies but for Paul, faith refers to Christ. Paul revisits the story of Abraham in the light of his faith in the one God and no longer through his justification by the works of Mosaic Law. Thus Abraham is considered as the ancestor of all believers, Jewish and non-Jewish. The new community is granted an identity and is called to agree with one another (Rom 15, 5) in faith. The one God is now identified by his action in Jesus Christ.

This thesis explores and analyzes Origen of Alexandria’s conviction that Scripture is itself the enfleshed Christ, or that “in the Scriptures the Word became flesh that he might tabernacle among us” (Philoc 15.19). For Origen, Scripture as the “Word of the Lord” is identical to the Word who was “with God,” and who “was God” in the Johannine Prologue. The Word assumes flesh not only in his birth, but also through the words and phrases of the patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. As a result, many scholars have noted the interesting “parallel” or “analogy” Origen draws between Scripture and the Incarnation, but this study provides the first comprehensive and focused treatment of Scripture as incarnate Word in Origen’s work. Ultimately, it demonstrates that for Origen, biblical interpretation is nothing less than a direct noetic encounter with the person of Christ, allowing the reader to know him in any time or place, to see him transfigured in the movement from the letter to the spirit, and even to consume his flesh and blood. Following an introductory chapter, the project consists of two parts. Part One (Chapters Two and Three) addresses the nature of “scriptural flesh” in Origen’s work. Chapter Two seeks to articulate what it means for the Word to become “flesh” in the first place, as well as what is required to “lift the veil” and perceive that flesh as divine. By examining the role of the cross in Origen’s Christology, it demonstrates that it is only in light of the Passion, through the lens of the crucified Christ, that the divinity of both man (Jesus) and text (Scripture) is made manifest. Chapter Three looks to define this scriptural “flesh” in Origen’s thought, specifically by relying on the doctrine of the epinoiai (the “aspects” or biblical titles of Christ). It is the epinoiai that clothe Christ and give him shape through the text. Part Two (Chapters Four and Five) addresses the theological and spiritual implications for the reader and interpreter of Scripture. Chapter Four examines the “coming of Christ” (parousia) as an individualized noetic phenomenon, brought about by the Christological reading of Scripture in any time or place. Finally, Chapter Five addresses the consumption of Christ through the Scriptures, which turns out to be much more about hermeneutics than about sacramental theology. A short conclusion follows, raising some of the broader implications for Origen studies as well as for the study of early Christian biblical exegesis.