No description available.

This dissertation contends that in spite of the increasing trajectory toward a more corporate, covenantal understanding of justification within Pauline scholarship since the emergence of the New Perspective on Paul, there still remains significant evidence that justification, at its core, is concerned with the individual before God in need of grace, who is counted righteous apart from any human works. Chapter 1 provides a history of research that traces this corporate trajectory within modern scholarship, as well as noting some of the responses to it. Chapter 2 examines the case for the presence of Jewish legalism at Paul's time of writing, to which he responds with his doctrine of justification by faith. Though E. P. Sanders successfully showed that legalism did not define second-temple Judaism, his work does not rule out the possibility of legalism within elements of the religion during the lifetime of Paul. This legalism would be more subtle than in pre-Sanders caricatures of Judaism, and is intricately tied to ethnocentrism, since the works in question were often those such as circumcision, which separated Jews from Gentiles--hence, ethnocentric legalism. Chapters 3 and 4 apply a framework that does not rule out legalism to three key justification texts (Gal 2:16; Rom 3:20; Rom 4:1-8). In these passages, Paul alludes to or cites a psalm text, each of which highlights an underlying anthropological approach to justification that denies the place of works, which was also timeless, though now fully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus. Chapter 5 examines evidence in other places in Paul, including some of the disputed letters, that undergirds the idea that fundamental to justification and Pauline soteriology in general is a distinction between grace (through faith) and works. Chapter 6 seeks to align the present argument with more corporate concerns in Pauline soteriology through exegesis of two passages that are often considered to be linchpin texts for the New Perspective (Rom 3:27-30; Eph 2:14-18). Chapter 7 provides a summary of the argument, as well as implications of the present study, with further reflection on what it means for future work on the subject.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

[Greek words romanized in title and description] This dissertation defends the thesis that the Pauline phrase, pistis Christou ("faith of Christ" [Rom 3:22,26; Gal 2:16, 20; 3:22; Phil 3:9; Eph 3:12]), in its various contexts, is best translated as "faith in Christ" (objective genitive) and not "faith/faithfulness of Christ" (subjective genitive). Chapter 1 surveys the history of the debate from 1795 to the present. Chapter 2 gives an overview of the use of pistis ("faith") in the LXX and the rest of the NT corpus outside of Paul's letters. It is argued that the LXX usage of pistis supports the subjective genitive interpretation, but the NT usage argues for the objective genitive interpretation. Chapter 3 investigates the use of "faith" in the writings of the apostolic fathers. The research shows that the fathers use pistis along the lines of NT writers and the evidence from their writings also supports our thesis concerning the pistis Christou phrase in Paul. Chapter 4 addresses the nature of the genitive case, Paul's use of the genitives Christou, kuriou, and Theou. Also in chapter 4, the main arguments made in defense of the Subjective genitive interpretation are summarized and evaluated. Chapters 5-7 are exegetical in nature and make up the core of this dissertation. Arguments are made from the context of each letter in which the pistis Christou phrase appears (Romans, Galatians, and Philippians). First, the meaning of pistis Christou is sought in its immediate context and the results evaluated in light of the broader context of each letter. We found that in all these instances, the reading "faith in Christ" for pistis Christou is the more probable reading in context. Chapter 8 summarizes the results of this investigation and evaluates the thesis proposed in this dissertation. Appendices 1-4 cover topics such as (1) why the debate is limited to the subjective and objective genitives (appendix 1), (2) examples of subjective and objective genitives in the NT (appendix 2), (3) pistis in the rest of Paul's letters (appendix 3), and (4) pistis Christou in Ephesians 3:12 (appendix 4). / This item is only available to students and faculty of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. If you are not associated with SBTS, this dissertation may be purchased from <a href="http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb">http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb</a> or downloaded through ProQuest's Dissertation and Theses database if your institution subscribes to that service.

This thesis aims to compare the words and governing ethical pattern of thought in the catalogue of virtues and vice in Colossians 3:5, 8, 12-17 to Greco-Roman and Jewish texts that are antecedent to, or contemporaneous with the writings of the apostle Paul and the Epistle to the Colossians. In carrying out this study, I will interact with and critique the arguments of scholars who have proposed that Paul and the author of Colossians are operating from a Stoic, Cynic or Aristotelian governing ethical pattern of thought. I will demonstrate that such positions are called into question in light of the lack of both central Greco-Roman ethical terms, and the lack of essential ethical concepts in both the generally agreed upon genuine Pauline epistles and in the Epistle to the Colossians in particular. Lastly, I will combine the results of the comparative studies of Colossians and the Greco-Roman and Jewish sources with an exegesis of Colossians in order to propose that: (i) the ethical terms of Colossians - while incidentally and peripherally influenced by the various Hellenistic ethical schools of thought - are most directly influenced by words found in the texts of the Jewish traditions, (ii) several of the ethical terms used by the author of Colossians are largely absent from and certainly uncommon in the Greco-Roman sources surveyed but widely attested in the Jewish sources, and that (iii) the author of Colossians presents his ethical material through an inherited binary format derived from the Jewish Two Ways tradition that is driven by a governing pattern of thought which focuses on Christlike transformation through the enactment and reception of cruciform love.

No description available.