Gerard Manley Hopkins suffered deeply. His “Terrible Sonnets” are confessional poetry that demonstrate his struggle with his God and with himself. This work analyses the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, starting Noah and ending with Jesus’s promise of a Paraclete, to analyze how both God and Man approach earthly and heavenly comfort. The work will then turn to Hopkins’s poetry to show that Hopkins’s unshakable faith and deep understanding of the Bible is both the cause and the cure of his suffering. This essay concludes that it is only through suffering that Hopkins, like Job, Jesus, and King Lear, is able to achieve both comfort and wisdom.

<p>On the most general, theological level this dissertation explores the origins, ensuing articulations, and intellectual implications of what has been characterized as a new Christian "political-historical consciousness" (politisch-historisches Bewusstsein)&mdashthat totalizing reconception of history and ecclesial identity that enabled early Christians to imagine themselves as simultaneously new to the world in terms of revelation and yet also ancient with respect to God's eternal plan. On the more specific and descriptive level, I propose that a key to mapping the early development of this new historical consciousness comes via detailed analysis of a single term introduced by the apostle Paul into the Christian theological lexicon, the noun <italic>mysterion</italic> and the particular understanding of history and revelation that is commonly coupled with it, an understanding I refer to in varying ways as the "once hidden, now revealed" mystery schema. It is, I claim, the historical arrangement of this once hidden/now revealed discourse, and thus the comprehensive division of time into adjacent eras of concealment and revelation, that provided Christians of the first two centuries with the intellectual architecture and concomitant discursive schema that formulated and then further legitimized some of the most original claims of Christian theology. Among these claims are, most notably, ecclesiological propositions regarding the status of the Gentiles among the people of God, hermeneutical propositions related to the revisionary Christian readings of Israel's scriptures, and christological propositions about the unified identity of the newly revealed Christ and the creator God of Israel. Insofar as such propositions were named as mysteries--which is to say, as realities newly revealed but eternally known by the God of Israel--and yet were argued independently of, if not in contradiction of, Torah and other authoritative Jewish writings (see chapters five), or on the basis of Jewish scriptures but without any obvious presence in their "plain sense" (see chapters six and seven), or by appeal to what had become a textual field of authoritative Christian writings (see chapter eight), some sort of new intellectual apparatus was needed to articulate these novel claims. The notion of an eternal mystery previously hidden but recently disclosed to the world, provided just such an apparatus. A detailed lexical analysis of "mystery" in Paul and other early Christian authors should thus provide a helpful constraint for analyzing these larger and less tangible subjects of early Christian thinking about divine revelation and the structure of history. </p><p> To be clear, in training my attention on the word and the "once hidden, now revealed" discourse, I am not presuming some sort of idealized concept-in-word equation (or, in this case, a discourse-in-word equation), the error of nomenclaturism as Saussure termed it. Nor am I suggesting that <italic>mysterion</italic> had any sort of fixed meaning, much less a totality of meanings to be smuggled into every occurrence. The linguistic axioms that words and things share no inviolable, one-to-one correspondence, and that sentences (or more complex syntactical strucutres), not individual lexemes, are to be regarded as the fundamental units determining meaning should by now be truisms. My focus on <italic>mysterion</italic> is simply motivated, first, by the observation that when this signifier is used by early Christian authors it most frequently refers to some theological or hermeneutical claim that was previously hidden but is now currently disclosed and thus, second, by the practicality of treating this word as a limiting heuristic for analyzing the more nebulous hidden/revealed discursive formation. This is not to confuse the word for the discourse. Rather it is to use this particular word, which so often appears to be a near technical term for the discourse, as an entry point into it.</p> / Dissertation

<p>This dissertation examines the ideological developments and strategies of boundary formation which accompanied the sociological novelty of gentiles&rsquo; becoming Jews in the Second Temple period. I argue that the phenomenon of gentile conversion influenced ancient Jews to re&ndash;conceive their God as they devised new ways to articulate the now&ndash;permeable boundary between Jew and &lsquo;other,&rsquo; between insiders and outsiders. Shaye Cohen has shown that this boundary became porous as the word &lsquo;Jew&rsquo; took on religious and political meanings in addition to its ethnic connotations. A gentile could therefore become a Jew. I focus on an ancient Jewish author who thought that gentiles not only could become Jews, but that they should: that of <italic>Joseph and Aseneth</italic>. Significant modifications of biblical traditions about God, Israel, and &lsquo;the other&rsquo; were necessary in order to justify, on ideological grounds, the possibility of gentile access to Jewish identity and the Jewish community. </p><p>One such rewritten tradition is the relationship of both Jew and gentile to the &lsquo;living God,&rsquo; a common epithet in Israel&rsquo;s scriptures. Numerous Jewish authors from the Second Temple period, among whom I include the apostle Paul, deployed this biblical epithet in various ways in order to construct or contest boundaries between gentiles and the God of Israel. Whereas previous scholars have approached this divine title exclusively as a theological category, I read it also as a literary device with discursive power which helps these authors regulate gentile access to Israel&rsquo;s God and, in most cases, to Jewish identity. <italic>Joseph and Aseneth</italic> develops an innovative theology of Israel&rsquo;s &lsquo;living God&rsquo; which renders this narrative exceptionally optimistic about the possibilities of gentile conversion and incorporation into Israel. Aseneth&rsquo;s tale uses this epithet in conjunction with other instances of &lsquo;life&rsquo; language not only to express confidence in gentiles&rsquo; capability to convert, but also to construct a theological articulation of God in relationship to repentant gentiles which allows for and anticipates such conversion. A comparison of the narrative&rsquo;s &lsquo;living God" terminology to that of the book of <italic>Jubilees</italic> and the apostle Paul sets into relief the radical definition of Jewishness which <italic>Joseph and Aseneth</italic> constructs &mdash; a definition in which religious practice eclipses ancestry and under which boundaries between Jew and &lsquo;other&rsquo; are permeable.</p> / Dissertation

<p>In his important work, The Beginnings of Jewishness, Shaye J. D. Cohen has argued that what it meant to be a Jew underwent considerable revision during the second century B.C.E. While previously a Jew was defined in terms of ethnicity (by which Cohen means biological descent), in the wake of Judaism's sustained encounter with Hellenism, the term Jew came to be defined as an ethno-religion--that is, one could choose to become a Jew. Nonetheless, the recent work of scholars, such as Christine E. Hayes, has demonstrated that there continued to exist in early Judaism a strain of thinking that, in theory at least, excluded the possibility that Gentiles could become Jews. This genealogical exclusion, found in works such as Jubilees, was highly indebted to the "holy seed" theology evidenced in Ezra-Nehemiah, a theology which defined Jewishness in genealogical terms.</p> <p>This dissertation will attempt to contribute to a greater understanding of differing conceptions of circumcision in early Judaism, one that more accurately describes the nature of Jewish thought with regard to Jewishness, circumcision, and conversion. In terms of methodology, my dissertation will combine historical criticism with a literary approach to the texts under consideration. The dissertation will focus on texts from the Hebrew Bible as well as Jewish texts from the Second Temple period as these writings provide windows into the various forms of Judaism from which the early Christian movement arose.</p> <p>Beginning with the Hebrew Bible, I will argue that there is no evidence that circumcision was considered to be a rite of conversion to Israelite religion. In fact, circumcision, particularly the infant circumcision instantiated within Israelite and early Jewish society excludes from the covenant those not properly descended from Abraham. In the Second Temple period, many Jews did begin to conceive of Jewishness in terms which enabled Gentiles to become Jews. Nonetheless, some Jews found this definition of Jewishness problematic, and defended the borders of Jewishness by reasserting a strictly genealogical conception of Jewish identity. Consequently, some Gentiles who underwent conversion to Judaism in this period faced criticism because of their suspect genealogy. Our sources record such exclusion with regard to the Herodians, Idumeans who had converted to Judaism. </p> <p>Additionally, a more thorough examination of how circumcision and conversion were perceived by Jews in the Second Temple period will be instrumental in better understanding early Christianity. It is the argument of this dissertation that further attention to a definition of Jewishness that was based on genealogical descent has broader implications for understanding the variegated nature of early Christian mission to the Gentiles in the first century C.E.</p> / Dissertation

The Old Greek version of the Book of Isaiah (hereafter LXX-Is) should be studied not only as a translation but also as an interpretation reflecting the theology of the translator or translator’s community in Egypt. ‘Free’ translation in LXX-Is usually appears not to originate from any misunderstanding of the probable Hebrew Vorlage or from a different Vorlage, but deliberately and consciously. Also it is important that these Greek renderings should be dealt with in a broader context, not merely verse by verse; because the Septuagint seems to have been regarded as a religious text in itself, circulating among Jews in Egypt. The most conspicuous theme in Septuagint Isaiah is a bold declaration concerning their identity. According to this, the Jewish diaspora in Egypt is the true remnant, and their residence in Egypt should be regarded as due to God’s initiative, thus “Eisodos” instead of “Exodus” is emphasized. Such ideas may be understood as displaying an apologetic concern of the Jewish diaspora to defend their continued residence in Egypt, whereas the Bible states firmly that Jews are not to go down there. Judgments against Egypt appear more strongly than MT, and this is another expression of their identity. LXX-Is supplies a bold translation in 19:18: a temple in Egypt, called the ‘city of righteousness’. The writings of Josephus testify to the existence of the Temple of Onias in Heliopolis under the reign of Ptolemy Philometor who apparently showed great favour towards the Jews. The temple’s significance should be considered as more than a temporary shrine for local Jewish mercenaries. Rather, it aimed to be a new Jerusalem under a lawful Zadokite priest. In addition to this, LXX-Is shares some interesting and distinctive ideas with Hellenistic Jewish literature, including views on priests and sacrifice, and an attitude towards foreign kings shared by Hellenistic Jewish literature of the period. To conclude, through comparing with MT and investigating LXX-Is as it stands, this work shows that LXX-Is is not just a translation but a Hellenistic Jewish document reflecting a particular theology of at least some Jews in Egypt. LXX-Is is shown to have its place within Jewish Hellenistic literature.

Isaiah, along with Psalms and Zechariah, is one of the most quoted OT books in the Fourth Gospel (FG). There are thorough studies regarding the citations from Psalms and Zechariah in the FG. However, a monograph-length study on the use of Isaiah in that book is still lacking. The present research aims to fill this gap. This study proposes not only to research into Isaianic citations in the FG (Is 40:3; Is 54:13; Is 53:1; Is 6:9-10), but also to complete a comparative study of their other occurrences in the NT. This is done by analysing eleven citations in total, of which nine are found in the FG and Synoptics, while the other two are found in Acts and in the Letter to the Romans (one citation in each). This comparative study leads to the conclusion that the same citation, even with the same Vorlage, can be used with two different meanings in two different places in the NT. Indeed, even where similar meanings are to be inferred, the exact uses of the citations have some nuances. Moreover, the deviations in the form of the citations should not be understood simply as due to defective memory: they may be explained by “application of exegetical techniques and devices” (Menken) or they may not. It seems rather that the Fourth Evangelist crafted them well, according to his genuine theological aims/agenda. In fact, he is much freer in the composition of his citations than the Synoptics. In common with the Synoptics, however, he mentions Isaiah in order to gain prophetic authority for some difficult claims and not merely to indicate the source of the citation. Finally, it is observed that all of the Isaianic quotations in the FG have one pattern in common: where the OT writer refers to the God of Israel, the Fourth Evangelist refers to Jesus Christ.

<p>The New Testament contains two important and potentially conflicting understandings of resurrection. One integrates resurrection into salvation, suggesting that it is restricted to the righteous; this view is found most prominently in the Pauline epistles. The other understands resurrection as a prerequisite for eschatological judgment and therefore explicitly extends it to all; this view is found most prominently in the book of Revelation. In the former, moral transformation is part of the process that results in resurrection; in the latter, moral transformation only affects what comes after resurrection, not the event of resurrection itself. The New Testament itself provides no account of how to hold together these understandings of resurrection and moral transformation.</p><p>This dissertation is an investigation of the ways in which second- and third-century Christian authors creatively struggled to bring together these two understandings. I select key authors who are not only important in the history of early Christian discussions of resurrection but who also make extensive use of the Pauline epistles. For each author, I investigate not only how they develop or resist the Pauline connection between resurrection and moral transformation but also how they relate that connection to the doctrine of the resurrection of all to face judgment found in Revelation (if they do at all).</p><p>The results are remarkably diverse. Irenaeus develops the Pauline connection between resurrection and moral transformation through the Spirit of God but fails to account for the resurrection of those who do not receive that Spirit in this life (although affirming that resurrection nonetheless). Tertullian begins from the model that takes resurrection to be fundamentally a prerequisite for judgment and struggles to account for Paul's connections between resurrection and salvation. Two Valentinian texts, the Treatise on the Resurrection and the Gospel of Philip, adopt the Pauline model to the exclusion of the resurrection of the wicked. Origen connects resurrection to moral transformation in yet another way, making it an event that pedagogically reflects the moral transformation of all rational creatures--whether for the better or worse. For Methodius of Olympus, the resurrection of the body produces the moral transformation that is the eradication of the entrenched inclination to sin, but the moral transformation in this life that is the resistance of the promptings of that entrenched inclination produces reward after the resurrection. In each case, strategies for holding together the two views found in the New Testament reveal the fundamental theological commitments underlying the author's overall understanding of resurrection.</p> / Dissertation

Due to the often inadequate methodology employed by scholars studying the pre-A.D. 70 Pharisees, new approaches are needed for analyzing the primary sources. Careful attention must be given to the literary genres of the four ancient sources of information on the Pharisees: the Psalms of Solomon, the New Testament, the writings of Josephus, and the rabbinic literature. As an example of such sensitivity to the ancient authors’ purposes in writing and to the literary genres they employed in conveying their information, this study uses the Gospels of Mark and Matthew as test cases. Careful analysis of authorial purpose, as revealed in the literary structuring and redactional modification of Gospel material, led to the following conclusions. First, the authors of Mark and Matthew display on interest in presenting a balanced picture of the Pharisees. Their major concern is to present the good news about Jesus Christ not to give a well-rounded view of those with whom he came into conflict. Information recorded on the Pharisees is limited almost exclusively to situations of conflict with Jesus, and the resulting picture is limited to negative aspects. Second, the different literary structures and authorial purposes of Mark and Matthew reveal both unity and diversity in their respective portraits of the Pharisees. Mark’s emphasis on rapid movement toward the Passion Narrative finds one of its major sources of propulsion in the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees, caused by his rejection of their oral tradition. On the other hand, Matthew’s major theme of Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the Law causes the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees to focus on who properly interprets, teaches, and obeys Scripture. Nevertheless, in spite of the diversity of structure and purpose, the Pharisaic portraits in Mark and Matthew are consistent. Both Gospels present the Pharisees as hypocrites who concentrate on the observance of minute details of religious ritual but who neglect the larger and more important issues of living for God.

This dissertation is a critical investigation of the engagements of scriptures in the life and speeches of U.S. Congresswoman Barbara C. Jordan (1936–1996). I engage in a research methodology that utilizes critical historical, auto/biographical, literary, and rhetorical analyses. My research agenda is to explain how scriptures work and are used by Barbara Jordan to illustrate an example of a larger phenomenon of scripturalizing and scripturalization outside of the context of institutional religion. In order to give a fuller context to Barbara Jordan’s rhetorical strategies, as an African American woman, I first consider the lives, speeches and use of scriptures of formidable 19th century African American women orators and political activists, Maria W. Stewart and Anna Julia Cooper, who serve as functional equivalents or precursors to Barbara Jordan. In this study, I found that Barbara Jordan makes American scripture, i.e. the Constitution, function in her speeches as a central component in a discursive rhetorical strategy of indirection, which I refer to as signifying on scriptures. She uses the Constitution, along with her personal history as an African American woman, to pretend mere sociopolitical conviction about social injustice. However, at the same time, she is strategic and intends to promote advocacy for racial justice and gender equality. Jordan uses the Constitution to signify on scriptures in a similar manner to how Maria W. Stewart and Anna Julia Cooper use Christian scriptures, i.e. the Bible, in their speeches to negotiate social and political power.

In this study it is not the author's aim to attempt to cover the field pertaining to the origin and development of the Eucharist. A vast number of competent works have been vrritten on the subject, but the primary purpose here is to examine the Eucharistic teachings of the Didache in the light of Canonical, early Christian, and non-Christian literature, in an effort to determine if the Didache presents the Eucharist (or Lord's Supper) in its original form as practiced in the primitive Christian Church of the first century. Further, we propose to show how the simplicity of the act was developed into a crystallized rite, or sacrament, by the time of the second century Church.