This work is an investigation to uncover the apologetic framework used by the Apostle Paul and discuss how it might be applied to current evangelistic efforts in Postmodernism. To be certain, there are a number of issues that face Christianity in the twenty–first century. I will give particular emphasis to the philosophical teachings and arguments that are characterized as being postmodernist in nature. Although within Postmodernism numerous individual challenges to Christian thought are present, I have selected four core issues to examine: (1) relative truth; (2) relative language and meaning; (3) philosophical pluralism; (4) a perceived lack of authenticity in the lives of professing Christians. The first three have been chosen because I believe there to be a meaningful downward progression from the first to the third, which culminates in what I believe is a relegation of the Christian Gospel to the realm of opinion and not truth. The fourth challenge has been selected because of recent research that argues it has perhaps become the single biggest obstacle for postmodernists in considering Christianity as a valid belief system. Once each of these evangelistic challenges is explored in detail and traced from its point of origin, attention is then given to uncovering the apologetic framework used by the Apostle Paul in the first century. This process is basically two–step in nature. Step one involves gaining an understanding of the Apostle Paul's world and discovering the factors that molded him into God's first century apologist. This involves examining Paul's culture, the competing religions and philosophies of the first century, the background and education of the Apostle, and his conversion and commissioning by God while on the road to Damascus. The resulting information allows us to build a bridge between the first century world of the Apostle Paul and today's postmodernist age. The second step in uncovering Paul's apologetic framework is to examine the biblical texts that describe the Apostle's evangelistic efforts and thoughts regarding the delivery of an apologia for the Christian faith. This equates to an investigation of the book of Acts and the Pauline corpus. The conclusions of this inquiry result in a new apologetic classification - that of tria martus or 'three witness' apologetics - with the cornerstone verse of the framework being 1 Thess. 1:5, which says: "for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake." Labeling each component of Paul's apologetic framework results in an analysis being performed of the message of Paul, the method of Paul, and the manner of Paul. After this has been done, one last question with respect to Paul's framework needs to be answered: Is the Apostle's apologia prescriptive or descriptive? While the book of Acts describes Paul's evangelistic and apologetic method in action, does Paul prescribe his method in his writings? Answering this question is pivotal in deciding whether to take Paul's framework and apply it to today's postmodernist culture. I believe the evidence points to Paul's framework being prescriptive, so the task then becomes how to apply the Apostle's apologia to Postmodernism, and how it addresses the challenges to Christianity that were identified earlier. As Paul's apologetic framework consists of three components, it becomes sensible for modern day apologists to take each part of the Apostle's framework and apply it to the various dimensions of the postmodernist unbeliever. This application results in an evangelist speaking to the rational, spiritual, and moral dimensions of non–Christians, with each challenge of Postmodernism being appealed to amongst the various dimensions. When applied, I believe three–witness apologetics represents a strong framework for giving honest and robust answers to the postmodernist unbeliever. While the postmodernist culture certainly poses some threats to Christianity, I firmly believe that the Apostle Paul would have thrived in today's climate and eagerly sought out converts from Postmodernism. I also believe that those who choose to use his apologetic framework will enjoy a harvest that enlarges the body of Christ and brings glory to the Creator of all humankind. / Thesis (Ph.D. (New Testament))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

This work is an investigation to uncover the apologetic framework used by the Apostle Paul and discuss how it might be applied to current evangelistic efforts in Postmodernism. To be certain, there are a number of issues that face Christianity in the twenty–first century. I will give particular emphasis to the philosophical teachings and arguments that are characterized as being postmodernist in nature. Although within Postmodernism numerous individual challenges to Christian thought are present, I have selected four core issues to examine: (1) relative truth; (2) relative language and meaning; (3) philosophical pluralism; (4) a perceived lack of authenticity in the lives of professing Christians. The first three have been chosen because I believe there to be a meaningful downward progression from the first to the third, which culminates in what I believe is a relegation of the Christian Gospel to the realm of opinion and not truth. The fourth challenge has been selected because of recent research that argues it has perhaps become the single biggest obstacle for postmodernists in considering Christianity as a valid belief system. Once each of these evangelistic challenges is explored in detail and traced from its point of origin, attention is then given to uncovering the apologetic framework used by the Apostle Paul in the first century. This process is basically two–step in nature. Step one involves gaining an understanding of the Apostle Paul's world and discovering the factors that molded him into God's first century apologist. This involves examining Paul's culture, the competing religions and philosophies of the first century, the background and education of the Apostle, and his conversion and commissioning by God while on the road to Damascus. The resulting information allows us to build a bridge between the first century world of the Apostle Paul and today's postmodernist age. The second step in uncovering Paul's apologetic framework is to examine the biblical texts that describe the Apostle's evangelistic efforts and thoughts regarding the delivery of an apologia for the Christian faith. This equates to an investigation of the book of Acts and the Pauline corpus. The conclusions of this inquiry result in a new apologetic classification - that of tria martus or 'three witness' apologetics - with the cornerstone verse of the framework being 1 Thess. 1:5, which says: "for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake." Labeling each component of Paul's apologetic framework results in an analysis being performed of the message of Paul, the method of Paul, and the manner of Paul. After this has been done, one last question with respect to Paul's framework needs to be answered: Is the Apostle's apologia prescriptive or descriptive? While the book of Acts describes Paul's evangelistic and apologetic method in action, does Paul prescribe his method in his writings? Answering this question is pivotal in deciding whether to take Paul's framework and apply it to today's postmodernist culture. I believe the evidence points to Paul's framework being prescriptive, so the task then becomes how to apply the Apostle's apologia to Postmodernism, and how it addresses the challenges to Christianity that were identified earlier. As Paul's apologetic framework consists of three components, it becomes sensible for modern day apologists to take each part of the Apostle's framework and apply it to the various dimensions of the postmodernist unbeliever. This application results in an evangelist speaking to the rational, spiritual, and moral dimensions of non–Christians, with each challenge of Postmodernism being appealed to amongst the various dimensions. When applied, I believe three–witness apologetics represents a strong framework for giving honest and robust answers to the postmodernist unbeliever. While the postmodernist culture certainly poses some threats to Christianity, I firmly believe that the Apostle Paul would have thrived in today's climate and eagerly sought out converts from Postmodernism. I also believe that those who choose to use his apologetic framework will enjoy a harvest that enlarges the body of Christ and brings glory to the Creator of all humankind. / Thesis (Ph.D. (New Testament))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

La fondation d’une Église locale par un apôtre constitue un élément important dans les relations interecclésiales. Une telle fondation peut cependant être l’objet de contestation, en particulier si le statut apostolique de la figure fondatrice n’est pas manifeste dans le Nouveau Testament. Une Église peut donc être amenée à se construire un passé apostolique, notamment par l'écriture de vies d’apôtre, qui peuvent souligner tant le statut apostolique de la figure que son caractère fondateur pour l’Église. La comparaison des modalités par lesquelles les Églises de Crète et de Chypre construisent leurs passés apostoliques à travers les figures de Tite et de Barnabé est l’objet du présent travail, lequel s’attache également à analyser les enjeux ecclésiaux et politiques de ces constructions et à étudier la réception de celles-ci par les Églises extérieures à ces îles. Après avoir présenté les données bibliques sur Tite et sur Barnabé puis avoir étudié la réception de ces figures dans le christianisme des cinq premiers s., cette thèse analyse le rapport que les Églises de Crète et de Chypre entretiennent avec elles. Elle s’intéresse d’abord aux écrits chypriotes et crétois composés à partir du Ve s. à leur sujet, puis aux textes qui les mentionnent de manière incidente, avant d’étudier les dévotions envers ces figures et les emplois identitaires de celles-ci, notamment durant les périodes franque et vénitienne. Ce travail examine enfin la réception des traditions sur Tite et sur Barnabé en dehors de leurs îles, dans la littérature de l’Empire byzantin et des mondes copte, syriaque et arménien. / The foundation of a local Church by an apostle is a major component in inter-ecclesial relationships. However, such foundation could be an object of dispute, especially if the apostolic status of the founder is not obvious in the New Testament. That is why a Church could be brought to build an apostolic past, notably by the production of apostle' lives, which can emphasize both the apostolic status of the figure and its founding feature of the church. The aim of this study is to compare how the Churches of Crete and Cyprus build their apostolic past through the figures of Titus and Barnabas. This work also analyzes the ecclesial and politic stakes of theses constructs and their reception by the Churches outside Crete and Cyprus. After presenting the New Testament datas about Titus and Barnabas, this thesis studies the reception of these figures in the Christianity in the first five centuries. Then it analyzes the relationship between these figures and the Churches of Crete and Cyprus. To do it, it interests first to the writings composed about them from the 5th century, then to the Cretan and Cypriot texts which mention them in an indirect way. Then, it intends to study the devotional practices toward these figures and their identity uses, especially during the periods of Frankish and Venetian rule. Finally, this work examines the reception of Cretan and Cypriot traditions regarding Titus and Barnabas outside their respective island, in the hagiographical and not hagiographical literature of the Byzantine Empire and of the Coptic, Syriac and Armenisch worlds.

No description available.

This study examines the centrality of the body in the apostle Paul's resurrection ideals. It is argued that Paul holds to a non-propositional understanding of resurrection that is grounded in recurrent patterns of human embodiment. Such an assertion stands in stark contrast to the pervading scholarly consensus, which is exceedingly cognicentric in its outlook and premised on an untenable opposition of body and mind. In contrast to this consensus, which disembodies resurrection, the present study demonstrates the extent to which Paul's resurrection ideals are somatically grounded. Working within a theoretical matrix that integrates the study of cognition and culture, this study utilises methodologies drawn from cognitive linguistics. Three theoretical concepts are particularly elaborated in relation to Paul: (1) Mark Johnson's understanding of image schemata, (2) George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's understanding of conceptual metaphor, and (3) Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner's understanding of conceptual blending. These three theoretical concepts are utilised in concert with one another and thus constitute this study's methodological apparatus. After demonstrating the inherent cognicentrism of standard scholarly approaches (ch. 1), this study examines four aspects in which resurrection can be seen as an embodied concept. Chapter 2 establishes a conceptual framework in which resurrection texts can be both identified and interpreted. It is argued that the concept of RESURRECTION is necessarily abstract and metaphorical in nature, though fundamentally grounded in recurrent patterns of human embodiment. In ch. 3 attention is directed to Paul's transformation metaphors and notions of both dualism and monism in the apostle's thought. It is argued that Paul works within a dualistic framework characterised not by opposition (e.g., body vs. soul) but rather by tensive integration (e.g., the embodied soul). Building on this assertion, in ch. 4 we examine the extent to which Paul understands resurrection as a present (and not merely future) experience. Critically assessing the apostle's eschatological outlook, this chapter argues that the somatic interior functions as the location of present resurrection. In ch. 5 this experience of present resurrection is further elaborated in light of Paul's broader participationist ideals. It is demonstrated that Paul's eschatology fosters a specific kind of resurrection experience in the present, one that is mapped onto the human body itself and elaborated via an in-out transformative interplay. Finally, ch. 6 offers a synthesis of the argument, scholarly contribution, and suggested avenues for further research.

The debate around the issue of homosexuals in Isl m has recently gained momentum globally. New arguments surfaced which were not discussed previously by the jurists. Some have argued that homosexuality is genetic and others believe it is caused by a hormonal imbalance. Isl m has given Muslims a comprehensive social system in which to operate. It has reserved explicit judgment on many pertinent issues and allowed research to address contemporary challenges by means of Ijtih d (personal reasoning). The Islamic judicial system states unequivocally and unambiguously that it expects from its followers to respect the judicial process. This thesis aims to address the most recent arguments by Muslim homosexuals. I will employ Qiy s (analogical deduction) to assess these latest claims and formulate an Islamic judgment regarding them. The formulation of this judgment, though, will take place sketching a legal and historical background of homosexuality in Isl m.

No description available.

Modern interpreters of Paul, confronted with the ubiquitous and enigmatic phrase “in Christ,” have generally ignored “messiah” as a determinative category for explaining the idiom. This is due in part to a scholarly tradition which holds that Paul did not use χριστός with its conventional sense of “messiah.” However, recent scholarship on early messianology, emphasizing the creative interpretation of scripture in the production of messiah texts, has found that Paul’s usage follows the conventions of ancient Jewish messiah language. Drawing upon this revisionist model, I argue that Paul’s use of the phrase ἐν χριστῷ and its variants is explicable in terms of his messianic re-appropriation of authoritative literary traditions. Put differently, Paul’s “in Christ” language is an innovation that nevertheless follows the customs of ancient Jewish messiah speculation. Chapter one, recounting modern treatments of “participationism” and associated language in Paul, illustrates a virtually uniform neglect of messiahship in describing his “in Christ” language. Chapter two reviews the rise of revisionist accounts of ancient Jewish messiah language which eschew the totalizing concept of “the messianic idea” and emphasize instead linguistic conventions common to messiah texts: the creative re-appropriation of scripture, the reuse of messiah syntagms in new literary contexts, and the frequent recourse to a relatively small pool of literary sources to generate conceptions of messiahship. Chapter three, a study of Paul’s messianic interpretation of the promises concerning Abraham’s seed, concludes that the phraseology “in Christ” derives from the Jewish scriptural words “in your seed,” and that the use of the idiom to denote Christ’s instrumentality in God’s actions and the identification of people as believers arises from this tradition. Chapter four, a study of Paul’s messianic interpretation of the victory of the Danielic heavenly man, concludes that Paul’s concept of solidarity with the messiah is based on that between Daniel’s “one like a son of man” and the people of God and is often expressed with the phrase “in Christ.” Finally, chapter five is a two-part catalog of “in Christ” language in Paul’s letters, part one consisting of a syntactical analysis of every instance and part two a conceptual analysis of every instance in light of the findings of chapters three and four. In sum, Paul’s “in Christ” language, like ancient Jewish messiah language generally, is the product of its author’s creative interpretative enterprise to understand and explain his messiah.

Esta pesquisa analisa a postura do Apóstolo Paulo frente à instituição da escravidão do Império Romano no período do Novo Testamento. Explica a escravidão como uma forma de dominação que representava um dos conflitos a serem superados pelas comunidades paulinas. Mostra que o pensamento teológico de Paulo foi forjado através de conflitos vivenciados ao longo de sua carreira como missionário, pastor e teólogo. Expõe os principais temas da teologia paulina no que tange o assunto da escravidão e liberdade. Para tanto, parte da experiência de conversão do apóstolo, a saber, o encontro com o Cristo ressuscitado, destacando a importância desse evento e implicações teológicas do mesmo. Toma o título de Kyrios como um dos principais eixos hermenêuticos para a compreensão da postura de Paulo frente às situações de dominação presentes na sociedade. Analisa a carta de Paulo a Filêmon como resultado de um processo histórico em que Paulo se vê na obrigação de posicionar-se diante da instituição da escravidão e a forma como esse posicionamento pode ser encontrado em sua teologia. Propõe uma atualização de sentido para carta a Filêmon, mostrando a aplicabilidade dos princípios utilizados por Paulo, principalmente no que diz respeito à agápe. / This research analyzes the attitude of the Apostle Paul against the institution of slavery in the Roman Empire in the New Testament period. Explains slavery as a form of domination that posed a conflict to be overcome by the Pauline communities. Shows that Paul's theological thinking was forged through conflict experienced throughout his career as a missionary, pastor and theologian. Sets out the main themes of Pauline theology regarding the issue of slavery and freedom. To this end, part of the conversion experience of the apostle, namely, the encounter with the risen Christ, highlighting the importance of this event and theological implications of it. Take the title of Kyrios as one of the main hermeneutic for understanding the attitude of Paul in the face of situations of domination in society. Examines Paul's letter to Philemon as a result of a historical process in which Paul finds himself compelled to place himself before the institution of slavery and how this position can be found in his theology. Proposes a sense to update letter to Philemon, demonstrating the applicability of the principles used by Paul, especially as regards agape.

This dissertation seeks to answer the following question: how did the doctrine of justification fare one hundred years after Paul's death (c. AD 165)? The thesis argued is that Paul's view of justification by faith is present in the second century, which particularly challenges T. F. Torrance's long-held notion that the Apostolic Fathers abandoned this doctrine. Chapter 1 provides an overview for the study. Groundwork is laid by providing a history of research on the reception of Paul in the second century as well as a section examining the important works on justification in the Fathers. Chapter 2 examines justification in 1 Clement. Looking primarily at chapter 32, it is argued that Clement held to justification by faith alone apart from works, despite the frequent claim that he held to works righteousness. Chapter 3 analyzes the seven letters of Ignatius. Although he only makes one pertinent reference to justification, Ignatius does have much to say against Judaism, which reveals a good deal about his view of justification. Chapter 4 covers the oft-tread ground of justification in the Epistle to Diognetus. The ninth chapter of Diognetus contains the clearest expression of justification in the second century. Chapter 5 surveys the Odes of Solomon. This overlooked songbook has a wealth of soteriological motifs, including mentions of justification. In at least three Odes there appears to be a dependence on Paul for the Odist's view of justification, and at times, imputation. Chapter 6 explores justification in Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho. Trypho informs Justin that he must keep the whole law in order to be saved. Justin, in turn, looks to the Old Testament, particularly to Abraham, as proof that justification comes by faith and not by adherence to the law. The five authors examined demonstrate greater theological continuity between the first and second centuries than has often been recognized. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith was not replaced with works righteousness in the following century. Justification fared well one hundred years after the Apostle's death.