The aim of this work is to attempt to read the text of Genesis 18-19 in line with the canonical approach of Brevard S Childs in order to critique his programme through its actual praxis. In chapter 1 a historical introduction to the discipline of 'biblical theology' and its texts provides a background against which to contextualise Childs's own work and its historical development. A detailed description of the approach in terms of its historical justification and its actual praxis appears in chapter 2. There certain common criticisms are encountered and refuted. It is also suggested that Childs's approach is often the target of unwarranted criticism based upon an assumed foundationalist view of hermeneutics. In chapter 3, this is developed further and it is argued that the non-foundationalist hermeneutics of Stanley E. Fish provide a heuristically powerful way of understanding the canonical approach and its 'community of faith'. Two aspects of the praxis of the canonical approach form the core of chapter 4: the necessary role of narrative presuppositions and the potential role of diachronic studies of biblical texts. A description of presuppositions necessary for understanding Genesis 18-19 are drawn from Genesis 1-17 and outlined, and the diachronic studies of H. Gunkel is used as an exemplar to test the illumination which diachronic studies may provide to readers of the canonical text. In chapters 5 and 6, a detailed exegesis is provided of the canonical text of Genesis 18 and Genesis 19. A short section on the effects of this exegesis on subsequent Old Testament texts completes chapter 6. In conclusion, the experience of reading the texts in this way is used to point out certain aspects and implications of the canonical approach which are missed when the approach is considered in purely theoretical terms.

No description available.

Today, some twelve million immigrants are unlawfully present in the United States. What response to this situation does Christian theology suggest for these immigrants and those who receive them? To this question about the status of immigrants before the law, the theological literature lacks an understanding of how federal U.S. immigration law developed, and it lacks a robust theological account of the governance of immigration. To fill this gap, the thesis presents three stages in the formation of the laws that designate some immigrants as aliens unlawfully present or illegal aliens, drawing out the moral argumentation in each phase and responding with moral theology. In the first stage, non-citizens were called aliens in U.S. law. In response to the argument that aliens exist as a consequence of natural law, Christian teaching indicates that immigrants are not alien either in creation or for the church. In the second stage, the authority of the federal government to exclude and expel aliens was established, leaving those who do not comply to be designated illegal aliens. To the claim that the federal government has unlimited sovereignty over immigration, interpretations of the Christian Scriptures respond that divine sovereignty limits and directs civil authority over immigration. In the third stage, legal reforms that were intended to end discrimination between countries allowed millions from countries neighboring the U.S. to become illegal aliens. These reforms turn out to be unjust on philosophical grounds and unneighborly on theological grounds. While federal law classes many as aliens unlawfully present in the United States, Christian political theology indicates that immigrants are not alien, the government of immigration is limited by divine judgment, and nationals of neighboring countries deserve special regard.