Traditionally, it has been argued that the Gospel of John was never a mission book (Missionsschrift) but rather a “Gemeindeschrift” written to confirm or deepen the faith of the early Christians of the Johannine community. In this study however, it is argued that although John’s Gospel may be encouraging to believers, the author rhetorically intended to persuade his readers to embody the missional motif, which started with the mission of Jesus. The narrative of Jesus and the Samaritan woman in John 4:1-42, is investigated as an example of how Jesus for the sake of His mission crossed all barriers of His time to reach out to the Samaritans and therefore issued a pattern, which is to be followed by His followers. It is also argued that when the mission of Jesus and the narrative of the Samaritan woman are integrated, an ethical missional paradigm is constructed in which the believers as members of God’s family are called to embody the “missional ethics” of Jesus. Finally, it is argued that the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman could be interpreted as a narrative of social and spiritual reunion with moral principles that challenges the contemporary church to embark on missional journeys of restoration as Jesus did with the Samaritans. / Dissertation (MA Theol)--University of Pretoria, 2014. / gm2014 / New Testament Studies / Unrestricted

In this dissertation the healing acts of Jesus in John are investigated against the ancient Mediterranean socio-religious and cultural background in which it realized. All sickness and healing realities realize within a particular socio-cultural context and may differ significantly within different cultures. For example, less than one hundred years ago depression was not diagnosed as an illness and there existed no therapeutic processes for the disease. When one investigates ancient healing narratives which tell of sickness realities almost 2000 years ago, before the dawn of the Western Bio-Medical research system and modernism, one must remember that the sickness realities of that time will differ to a great extent from the modern project‘s sickness realities and its constructs. The researcher must in other words be very sensitive about anachronistic misinterpretations and ethnocentrism - that is, a reductionistic view of sickness (and other) realities through your own worldview. For this reason the term sickness is used as an umbrella term, and a distinction is made between the curing of a disease and the healing of an illness. The word group curing and disease are words that are used in the Western Bio-Medical world, and are also deeply imbedded within the modernistic philosophical worldview. On the other hand the word group healing of an illness is more inclusive in the sense that it is sensitive to sickness realities as experienced and constructed in ancient Mediterranean societies. In the first century ancient Mediterranean temple oriented Judaism for example, a particular disease (like skin disease), unlike today, also had negative socio-religious implications for the afflicted person which sometimes resulted in marginalization and status deconstruction. Turning to John‘s healing narratives it should also be taken into account that his healing acts are presented as σημετα that is, signs which illustrate that Jesus is the Son of God, the source of life (cf. John 20:30-31; 10:32; 6:14). The question to be answered is, in what way does John present the healing narratives in order to illustrate that Jesus is the true source of Life (cf. John 1:4). The thesis is thus developed that John presents sickness realities that closely represent ¯"death”, crisis, disorientation, brokenness and loss of life possibilities within the ancient Mediterranean symbolic universe. John then presents Jesus as the divine transformation Agent, who restores and recreates life possibilities after a transformational interaction with the sick person. It is also argued that John‘s understanding of healing is not to be limited to the traditional Western Biomedical paradigm revolving around the curing of disease but also includes a view of Jesus‘ role as healer and restorer of spiritual brokenness, a tradition which originated in the Old Testament. The narrative regarding the discussion between Jesus and the Samaritan woman is used as an example of a situation in which Jesus offers someone the gift of life and spiritual restoration or healing which resulted in the representation of reality. Lastly it will be argued why the resurrection could be understood as a Johannine σημετον and also be interpreted as the culminating healing act in John‘s Gospel, illustrating that Jesus is the true source of life in abundance (cf. John 1:4; 10:10). / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2008. / New Testament Studies / PhD / Unrestricted

No description available.

Abstract There is a scarcity of programs addressing psychosocial suffering in post-genocide Rwanda. The locally-initiated models are understudied and lack legitimate support to strengthen their interventions. This study addresses this gap by exploring the Healing of Life Wounds (HLW) program and its context of implementation. HLW is a community-based program that was introduced in Rwanda in 1995 by a Rwandan, Dr. Simon Gasibirege, to facilitate mutual healing among members of the groups involved in the 1994 genocide. Using a critical ethnographic approach, a multi-method data set was obtained from two groups of participants from two separate organizations applying HLW model. One group of twenty-three community participants from one local association shared their experiences as they participated in HLW. The other group included seven experienced HLW facilitators who provided their perceptions about using HLW from an international organization operating in Rwanda. The data also included HLW documents and reflexive notes. Dialogic performance analysis was the overarching analytical approach of the different data sets. Data collection, analysis and interpretation were guided by principles of critical theories, indigenous methodologies and narrative inquiry. The findings indicate that healing psychosocial suffering in the post-conflict global South requires innovative approaches that critically address on-going psychosocial issues affecting the marginalized by giving them voice and working with them to integrate contextual healing techniques. This study suggests that healing psychosocial suffering through HLW is a consciousness-raising process by which participants gain voice, acquire new understanding of issues affecting them through the sharing of personal stories, and develop mutual support and humane identities. This development contributes to individual, group and community healing. Openness and willingness to share stories of brokenness in a trustful and supportive environment enhance HLW outcomes. The study contributes to theories of knowledge and healing practices in cross-cultural settings, and to critical interdisciplinary and transnational research.

Abstract There is a scarcity of programs addressing psychosocial suffering in post-genocide Rwanda. The locally-initiated models are understudied and lack legitimate support to strengthen their interventions. This study addresses this gap by exploring the Healing of Life Wounds (HLW) program and its context of implementation. HLW is a community-based program that was introduced in Rwanda in 1995 by a Rwandan, Dr. Simon Gasibirege, to facilitate mutual healing among members of the groups involved in the 1994 genocide. Using a critical ethnographic approach, a multi-method data set was obtained from two groups of participants from two separate organizations applying HLW model. One group of twenty-three community participants from one local association shared their experiences as they participated in HLW. The other group included seven experienced HLW facilitators who provided their perceptions about using HLW from an international organization operating in Rwanda. The data also included HLW documents and reflexive notes. Dialogic performance analysis was the overarching analytical approach of the different data sets. Data collection, analysis and interpretation were guided by principles of critical theories, indigenous methodologies and narrative inquiry. The findings indicate that healing psychosocial suffering in the post-conflict global South requires innovative approaches that critically address on-going psychosocial issues affecting the marginalized by giving them voice and working with them to integrate contextual healing techniques. This study suggests that healing psychosocial suffering through HLW is a consciousness-raising process by which participants gain voice, acquire new understanding of issues affecting them through the sharing of personal stories, and develop mutual support and humane identities. This development contributes to individual, group and community healing. Openness and willingness to share stories of brokenness in a trustful and supportive environment enhance HLW outcomes. The study contributes to theories of knowledge and healing practices in cross-cultural settings, and to critical interdisciplinary and transnational research.

Knowing is often framed by language; this moving arrangement of parts helps us make sense of our surround, rendering possible ways of relating, acting, and responding. Situated yet unsettled, the play of language enables us to mediate distances, to make sense of our frames while seeking other ways of being with and for. Through dialogue, these works attempt to reroute and reorient so that we may learn to see each other — and to see ourselves.