If Jesus's resurrection did not happen, the Christian faith is falsified. The question is therefore raised as to whether it is possible to prove the historicity of the resurrection, and thus verify the Christian faith. The problem is first historical (what is the nature of the evidence for the resurrection?) and secondly apologetic (how does the resurrection help in communicating the Christian faith?); this thesis aims to address the historical question, and introduce apologetics as a future concern. The work is set in context by a survey of approaches to the historical Jesus through the centuries, culminating in the "Third Quest for the Historical Jesus." The origins of the idea of resurrection are sought in an examination of ancient Hebrew ideas about death, exploring the development of hope from the survival of the community rather than the individual, through the awareness of the need for justice and the continuing relationship with God, through a range of metaphors to the first explicit hope of resurrection from the dead. The influence of Hellenism and ideas of immortality in the intertestamental period are noted, but these ideas were not adequate to explain the experience of Jesus's disciples. The New Testament is then surveyed to identify all resurrection traditions. Some traditions are theological and metaphorical, but some are narrative or apparently derived from a historical event. It is noted that some canonical books make relatively little of the resurrection, and that extracanonical books such as the Gospel of Thomas ignore it completely. A study of the extracanonical texts suggests that omission of resurrection tradition is due to later theological preference, rather than indicating early tradition implying that passion-resurrection tradition was a later innovation. Where there is extracanonical resurrection tradition, it is dependent upon canonical tradition. There follows a discussion of the various criteria which have been used to examine New Testament tradition for historicity, examining the strengths and weaknesses of each. It is concluded that no single criterion is adequate, but that it is possible to achieve a satisfactory degree of historical plausibility. The discussion returns to the New Testament traditions to identify where they purport to be historical, and then explored in the light of the historical criteria for plausibility. While there is clear theological development and interpretation, there is a persistent core tradition deriving from an original event. Alternative explanations, that the disciples invented resurrection to explain other experiences, are dismissed as resurrection is the least likely explanation for them to offer. The historical event itself is irrecoverable, but may be discerned by its effects. The most plausible explanation for the testimony underlying New Testament tradition, celebration on the first day of the week, and the explosive growth of the Jesus movement, is that the resurrection actually happened. Brief consideration is given to the implications of the resurrection for theology, eschatology, apologetics and engagement with postmodernism. / Thesis (M.A. (New Testament)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, in association with Greenwich School of Theology, U.K., 2009.

If Jesus's resurrection did not happen, the Christian faith is falsified. The question is therefore raised as to whether it is possible to prove the historicity of the resurrection, and thus verify the Christian faith. The problem is first historical (what is the nature of the evidence for the resurrection?) and secondly apologetic (how does the resurrection help in communicating the Christian faith?); this thesis aims to address the historical question, and introduce apologetics as a future concern. The work is set in context by a survey of approaches to the historical Jesus through the centuries, culminating in the "Third Quest for the Historical Jesus." The origins of the idea of resurrection are sought in an examination of ancient Hebrew ideas about death, exploring the development of hope from the survival of the community rather than the individual, through the awareness of the need for justice and the continuing relationship with God, through a range of metaphors to the first explicit hope of resurrection from the dead. The influence of Hellenism and ideas of immortality in the intertestamental period are noted, but these ideas were not adequate to explain the experience of Jesus's disciples. The New Testament is then surveyed to identify all resurrection traditions. Some traditions are theological and metaphorical, but some are narrative or apparently derived from a historical event. It is noted that some canonical books make relatively little of the resurrection, and that extracanonical books such as the Gospel of Thomas ignore it completely. A study of the extracanonical texts suggests that omission of resurrection tradition is due to later theological preference, rather than indicating early tradition implying that passion-resurrection tradition was a later innovation. Where there is extracanonical resurrection tradition, it is dependent upon canonical tradition. There follows a discussion of the various criteria which have been used to examine New Testament tradition for historicity, examining the strengths and weaknesses of each. It is concluded that no single criterion is adequate, but that it is possible to achieve a satisfactory degree of historical plausibility. The discussion returns to the New Testament traditions to identify where they purport to be historical, and then explored in the light of the historical criteria for plausibility. While there is clear theological development and interpretation, there is a persistent core tradition deriving from an original event. Alternative explanations, that the disciples invented resurrection to explain other experiences, are dismissed as resurrection is the least likely explanation for them to offer. The historical event itself is irrecoverable, but may be discerned by its effects. The most plausible explanation for the testimony underlying New Testament tradition, celebration on the first day of the week, and the explosive growth of the Jesus movement, is that the resurrection actually happened. Brief consideration is given to the implications of the resurrection for theology, eschatology, apologetics and engagement with postmodernism. / Thesis (M.A. (New Testament)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, in association with Greenwich School of Theology, U.K., 2009.

In this essay I discuss conscience as analyzed by Heidegger in his magnum opus Being and Time from 1927. In Heidegger´s phenomenological ontology conscience is an uncanny call that comes from ourselves and is directed to ourselves; an inner foreign voice that suddenly strikes us in our everydayness and summons us to face our own being, that is: our own uncanniness. According to Heidegger to face one´s being is to face the human existence itself as essentially free, finite and historical, which in its extension means to face oneself as the conscious being one is. My question focuses on the who: who is the one that calls inside of us – who is it that we listen to? Or, to put it differently: what in our existence makes it possible for us to simultaneously be the caller and the one that is being called on? Whereas Heidegger answers by referring to the distinction between Being and being(s), which is essential in his philosophy, I choose another and extended direction of interpretation, namely one that points precisely at the uncanny – demonic – character of existence. This interpretation is developed specifically in relation to some of Heidegger´s later writings, his readings of Sophocles´ Antigone as well as his Letter on Humanism. It is my intention to show that Heidegger through his analysis on the uncanny and historical human being implicitly makes room for a demonic understanding of conscience as an ethical phenomenon that relates it not only to being and death, but also to the dead.

No description available.

No description available.

This paper aims to show two things. On the one hand, it aims to discover that the interpretation executed by Gadamer of the Dilthian hermeneutic project ends up being one sided and reductionist in several respects, and therefore does not do justice to the fundamental hermeneutical plan of the critique of historical reason. Furthermore, we will show how Gadamerian hermeneutics continue with the Dilthian project assimilating trascendental elements that, ultimately, structurally operate the philosophical hermeneutics. / En el presente trabajo se intentará mostrar dos cosas. Por un lado, se apunta a descubrir que la lectura que realiza Gadamer del proyecto hermenéutico dilthyano termina por ser una interpretación unilateral y reduccionista en varios aspectos, y, por ende, no hace justicia al plan hermenéutico fundamental de la crítica de la razón histórica. Por otro lado, se mostrará cómo la hermenéutica gadameriana continúa con el proyecto dilthyano asimilando elementos trascendentales que terminan por operar estructuralmente la hermenéutica filosófica.

Étant un personnage secondaire issu de l’épisode évangélique qui raconte le martyre de Jean-Baptiste, Salomé est devenue un des thèmes préférés dans la littérature et les arts de la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle. En faisant partie des « femmes fatales », elle correspond bien aux interprétations fin-de-siècle : la faiblesse de l’homme, le pouvoir de la femme, l’esthétique raffinée mais morbide, la décadence nonchalante mêlée à un effroi irrémédiable. Le célèbre drame d’Oscar Wilde fait d’elle le sujet d’une réflexion philosophique du désir et de la mort. La fin du XIXe siècle ne signifie pas la fin de l’évolution de la figure de Salomé. Au contraire, elle constitue un nouveau point de départ. Au XXe siècle son histoire a connu non seulement un enrichissement au niveau structurel, mais aussi une diversification formelle. Aujourd’hui, les textes qui abordent Salomé forment un système. La formation et la transformation de ce système demande une observation qui porte une attention particulière à la continuité et à la rupture, à l’héritage et au renversement. Lorsque la danseuse est mise à côté du martyr, l’histoire doit faire face au déchirement : l’homme et la femme, le vocable et le visuel, l’ascétisme et le désir…d’où l’incertitude et la diversité de l’interprétation qui permettent à l’histoire de Salomé de résister à l’écoulement du temps. L’existence d’une multitude de textes sur le même mythe crée un espace où l’étude intertextuelle est rendue possible. / As a secondary character from the Gospel story that recounts the martyrdom of John the Baptist, Salome became one of the favorite themes in art and literature of the second half of the nineteenth century. As one of the “ femmes fatales ”, this figure corresponds to the Fin de Siècle imagination : the man’s weakness , the women’s power, the refined aesthetic but morbid, the decadence mixed with an irremediable terror. The famous play of Oscar Wilde made her the subject of a philosophical reflection of the desire and the death. The end of the nineteenth century doesn’t mean the end of the evolution of this mythic figure. On the contrary, it becomes a new starting point. In the twentieth century, Salome’s story has been enriched not only at the structural level, but also by a formal diversification. Today, the writings about Salome form a system. The formation and transformation of this system requires an observation that pays particular attention to the continuity and rupture, to the inheritance and reversal. When the dancer is compared to the martyr, the Salome’s story has to face a series of contrast : man and woman, word and vision, asceticism and desire ... The uncertainty and the diversity of interpretation allow the story of Salome to resist the passage of time. A multitude of texts on the same myth creates a space where the intertextual study is possible.

The preoccupation with the "historicity" of thought and existence is central to thehermeneutic-phenomenological branch of modern philosophy. Its foremostrepresentative is Martin Heidegger, who in his main work Sein und Zeit (1927)developed a theory of historicity, according to which human beings not only exist inhistory, but are themselves historical. In subsequent writings Heidegger argued thatnot only man, but also truth and being, must be understood "historically" in aparticular sense. The meaning and the impHcations of Heidegger's "historicization" ofphilosophy are here analyzed along two parallel tracks: as a theory of the conditions ofphilosophical understanding; second, as an incentive to new ways of respondingphilosophically to these conditions. The study focuses on the sense of belongingwhich Heidegger assigns to historicity, as a dialogical relation to an enigmatic originthat cannot be exhaustively articulated, but to which understanding must neverthelessrespond in repetition and critique. The idea of the "hermeneutic situation," and what itmeans to occupy such a situation, is shown to be central in this regard. Heidegger's"historicization" of the philosophical territory is inte reted as an exemplary attempt topreserve philosophy as a quest for "origins" in the explicit recognition of theinterminable historical mediation of thinking. His approach leads to a criticalquestioning of fundamental philosophical distinctions, such as the temporal and theeternal, the absolute and the relative, subject and object, and of truth as correspondence.Eventually he is led to question the ability of language to express thehistoricity of thought and of being, which can only be indicated by means of conceptssuch as "moment" (Augenblick) and "event" (Ereignis). In seven chapters the themeof historicity is explored from different angles, which together provide a guide toHeidegger's path from a philosophy of life to a thinking of being in the "otherbeginning." The study covers the full range of his writings, but it emphasizes thedevelopment from the earliest lectures, over Sein und Zeit, to the second major work,Beiträge zur Philosophie (1938, published posthumously in 1989).

Afrikaans: Die studie toon aan dat die vraag na die historiese Jesus deel is van hedendaagse teologiebeoefening. Nie alleen vanuit die wetenskaplik-teologiese wereld word die vraag aan die kerk en die teologie opgedring nie. Die vraag is ook populêr van aard. Daar is 'n algemene en polsende vraag na "Jesus". Hierdie vraag na en besinning oor Jesus word vanuit die kring van die tradisionele kerkvolk met agterdog bejeen. Dit blyk dat die resultate van huidige historiese Jesus-navorsing in kontras staan met dit wat die kerk tradisioneel oor Jesus glo en bely. Die kerkvolk vra van die kerk leiding daar¬oor. Uiteindelik plaas die huidige historiese Jesus-vraagstelling alle gevestigde teolo¬giese en geloofswaarhede van voor af op die tafel en vra van die kerk herbesinning. Daar word baie oorsigtelik aandag gegee aan die agtergrond en ontwikkeling van die vraag na die historiese Jesus die afgelope honderd en vyftig jaar soos wat dit gelei het tot die huidige lewendige debat en die vraag na die relevansie van die navorsing vir kerk en teologie. In die tweede plek bied die studie kortliks 'n verteenwoordigende oorsig oor huidi¬ge historiese Jesus-navorsing. Wat die navorsing in die VSA betref, word gekyk na die profiele wat R W Funk en J D Crossan van Jesus teken. Wat Suid-Afrika betref, word fasette van die uitgebreide Jesus-profiel en navorsing van A G van Aarde beskryf. Uit die Verenigde Koninkryk word die profiel van N T Wright (Engeland) en vanuit Euro¬pese bodem die profiel van W Schmithals (Duitsland) onder die loep geneem. Ten opsigte van elkeen van hierdie navorsers word egter nie net op elkeen se onderskei¬dende Jesus-profiel gefokus nie, maar ook op die betrokke navorser se siening van die teologiegeskiedenis van die vroegste Christendom asook die betrokke persoon se sie¬ning van die relevansie van sy navorsing vir kerk en teologie. Dit hang saam met die navorser se siening van die kerklike belydenis en kanonbeskouing. In die derde plek betoog die studie dat die huidige historiese Jesus-navorsing die teologie (en die kerk) in 'n dilemma plaas. Hierdie dilemma spruit voort uit die histo¬riese bewussyn van die moderne mens. Moderne gelowiges is geneig om die geloof afhanklik te maak van dit wat histories, empiries-bewysbaar gebeur het. Indien 'n saak nie histories bewys kan word nie, word dit nie as waarheid aanvaar nie. Indien weten¬skaplike, historiese argumentvoering dan bevind dat daardie historiese gebeure nie werklik plaasgevind het nie, bring dit die geloof van moderne mense in gedrang. Die gevolg is dat op een van twee maniere gereageer word. Enersyds word teruggeval op 'n fundamentalistiese Skrifhantering. Dit kom daarop neer dat die wetenskaplike, his¬toriese ondersoek en die resultate daarvan verwerp word as onwaar en die Bybelse be¬skrywing van die gebeure onkrities as waar (in die historiese sin) aanvaar word. Andersyds word in 'n ander uiterste verval wanneer moderne mense, wat tot die oortui¬ging kom dat die gebeure wat in die Bybel beskryf word, nie historiese gronde het nie, die Bybel as onwaar afmaak. Albei hierdie benaderings kom neer op vorms van her¬meneutiese dwalings wat bekendstaan as historiese positivisme. In hierdie verband betoog die studie dat daar ten opsigte van die waarheid duidelik onderskeid gemaak moet word tussen geskiedenis en teologie. Die teologie het nie die histories (of weten¬skaplik) onmoontlike of onbewysbare as probleem me. Die teologie (spesifiek die Bybels- Reformatoriese teologie in die dialektiese tradisie) gaan uit van die aanname dat God en God se betrokkenheid in hierdie wêreld die geskiedenis en die menslike verstaans- en verwysingsraamwerk ver te bowe gaan. Die implikasie daarvan is dat 'n gebeure deur die teologie as die waarheid aangemerk kan word en in die geloof geglo en bely kan word ten spyte daarvan dat die gebeure moontlik nie histories empiries bewys kan word nie, of dat dit dalk selfs nie histories plaasgevind het nie. Teen die agtergrond word daarop gewys dat die resultate van huidige historiese lesus-navorsing die historisiteit van sekere sentrale belydenissake van die kerk betwyfel. Vir mense wat 'n histories-positivistiese waarheidsbeskouing handhaaf, beteken dit óf afskeid van die geloof 6f 'n fundamentalistiese reaksie teen die historiese Jesus-navorsing. Die studie betoog dat die gesprek (vera! kerklik en teologies) kan vor¬der indien die hermeneutiese aanpassing na 'n postmodeme waarheidsbeskouing gemaak word. Dit sou beteken dat daar sinvolle teologiese refleksie ter wille van kerk en teologie kan wees oor sentrale sake in die Christelike geloof soos die maagdelike verwekking, die opstanding en die Godheid van Jesus. Die implikasie daarvan is dat daar 'n pleidooi gelewer word vir 'n dringende eietydse interpretasie van die geloofsbe¬lydenisse 6f selfs dat die kerk daaraan oorweging behoort te skenk om 'n eietydse bely¬denisskrif daar te stel wat die huidige teologiese en historiese vraagstelling herme¬neuties verdiskonteer. Hierdie pleidooi word begrond deur te wys op die manier hoe die historiese Jesus-navorsing die historisiteit (en waarheid) van sentrale sake in die Christelike belydenis, soos die maagdelike verwekking, die opstanding van Jesus en die Godheid van Jesus problematiseer. Daar word baie kortliks gewys op eksegetiese en hermeneutiese moontlikhede hoe die kerk en teologie nie noodwendig afstand hoef te doen van hierdie sentrale belydenisse wanneer die historiese bewysbaarheid daarvan wegval nie. Teen die agtergrond van 'n postmodeme waarheidsbegrip kan die sake steeds deur gelowiges as die waarheid geglo en bely word. Die studie wys daarop dat tendense in die huidige historiese Jesus-navorsing dui op 'n loslaat van die dialektiek ten opsigte van byvoorbeeld Skrif- en kanonbeskouing. Dit het relatiwisme tot gevolg wat neerkom op afskeid neem van die Bybels-Reformatoriese teologie. Die studie sluit af deur daarop te wys dat die huidige historiese Jesus-:vraagstelling 'n uitdaging aan kerk en teologie bied om die geloof in Jesus Christus in die een en twintigste eeu opnuut te verwoord. Hierdie nuwe verwoording kan 6f 'n bevestiging wees van wat die kerk tot op hede oor Jesus geglo en bely het, 6f dit kan 'n verruiming van die belydenis wees, óf dit kan afskeid neem van die belydenis en 'n nuwe belydenis en grondslag vir 'n nuwe Christendom daarstel. English: The study argues that the quest for the historical Jesus has become an integral part of modem theology. The quest challenges the church and theology not only from a scien¬tific theological point of view, but also because of its general popularity. There is a general and pulsing probing regarding "Jesus". However, the quest for the historical Jesus is viewed with suspicion within the circle of traditional church members. Church folk asks for guidance concerning this matter. Ultimately, the current historical Jesus quest challenges all established theological and authentic veracities and the church is expected to reconsider its position. In the first part of this study, attention is given as to the background and development of the quest during the last one hundred and fifty years that culminated in the current lively debate and the question regarding its rele¬vance for church and theology. Secondly, the study provides a brief representative review regarding current histo¬rical Jesus-research. As far as research in the USA is concerned, consideration is given to the profiles drawn by R W Funk and J D Crossan. In South Africa aspects of the vast and extensive Jesus profile and research done by A G van Aarde are described. From the United Kingdom the Jesus profile of NT Wright (England) and from Europe the research by W Schmithals (Germany) are investigated. Regarding each of these researchers, the focus is not only on each of their distinctive Jesus profiles, but also on both the individual researcher's view on the continuity and discontinuity between Jesus and early Christianity and the relevance of his research for church and theology. The researcher's opinion regarding the Creed of the church and canonical views are also taken in account. Thirdly, the study considers the reasons why present historical Jesus research places theology (and the church) in a dilemma. This dilemma evolves from the histori¬cal consciousness of modem people. Modem believers are inclined to subject their belief to that which can be proved historically. According to this concept of truth, if something cannot be proven historically, it cannot be accepted as the truth. Should scientific, historical argumentation find that those particular historical occurrences did not really take place, or that it cannot be proven historically, it places the beliefs of modem individuals in jeopardy. The result is that people react in one of two possible ways. On the one hand reversion to a fundamentalist treatment of Scriptures takes place. This means that the results of the scientific, historical investigations are rejected and considered false and views on events in the Bible are accepted uncritically in a his¬torical sense. On the other hand, an opposite extremity is reached when modem indivi¬duals conclude that these events cannot be proved on historical grounds and therefore declare that the Bible is untrue. Both approaches lead to the hermeneutic fallacy known as historical positivism. The study argues that as far as the question for truth is con¬cerned, an explicit distinction must be drawn between history and theology. The theo¬logy does not consider the historical (or scientific) impossibilities or unprovable to be a problem. Theology, specifically Biblical-Reformed theology in the dialectic tradition, accepts that God and the concern for God transcends history and human understanding. An event seen as being the truth can be object of belief and confession regardless of the fact it cannot be proved historically or that it might not occur historically. Against this background it is pointed out that the results of the current historical Jesus research questions the historicity of certain central creeds of the church. For people upholding a historical-positivistic view on truth it means either departure from their faith or a fundamentalistic reaction against historical Jesus research. The study argues for another point of departure. If an adaptation to a post-modern concept of truth can be made hermeneutically, the discussion may bear fruit. This would mean that there could be meaningful theological reflection on central issues for Christian faith, such as the virginal conception of Jesus, his resurrection and the confession that Jesus is God. Subsequently, the church needs a contemporary interpretation of its Creeds or should consider a creation of a contemporary Creed which will reflect the current theological and historical points in question. It is argued that there is no neces¬sity for the church to deny the above-mentioned "central" confessions when the possibi¬lity to prove them historically falls away. Against the background of a postmodem view of truth, these matters could still be believed and seen as objects of confession. However, it is also argued that some tendencies of the current historical Jesus research imply an absolvement of dialectical theology with regard to the views on Scripture and canon. Such a relativism can yield to the parting from the Biblical¬ Reformed theology. The study concludes with the opinion that the current quest for the historical Jesus challenges church and theology to confess anew in the twenty first century faith in Jesus Christ. Such a new declaration can either be an affirmation of what the church up until now believed and confessed with regard to Jesus, or it can broaden the creed, or it can depart from the creed and bring about a new creed as basis for a new Christia¬nity. / Thesis (DD (New Testament))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / New Testament Studies / unrestricted

This research project concerns itself with the three disputed passages of Christian import as preserved in extant manuscripts of the AJ (Ἰουδαϊκὴ Ἀρχαιολογία a.k.a. Antiquitates Judaicae), viz.: AJ, XVIII, 3, 3 / 63 (i.e. the so-called Testimonium Flavianum), AJ, XVIII, 5, 2 / 116 -119 (i.e. the references to John the Baptist) and AJ, XX, 9, 1 / 200 - 203 (i.e. the references to James the brother of Jesus). Within the context of contemporary historicity research outcomes, and employing an interpretist/constructivist episteme, a series of critical analyses was undertaken aimed at verifying to what degree the three passages in question may be deemed to be in any way authentic and/or historically reliable. The result of the investigation proves beyond reasonable doubt that no reliable extra-biblical/scriptural accounts exist to support the historical existence of, inter alia, Jesus of Nazareth, James the Just or John the Baptist. Certainly, no such accounts ever appeared in Josephus’ original texts. Furthermore, and most importantly, the three passages are confirmed to be total forgeries initiated in the first four centuries of the Common Era most likely by Origen and Eusebius respectively. / PhD (Greek), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015