Browse results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11,583 items for :

  • Biblical Interpretations x
  • Upcoming Publications x
  • Upcoming Publications x
  • Just Published x
  • Search level: Chapters/Articles x
Clear All

Abstract

The book of Ruth is the only text of the Hebrew Bible which lacks a single mention of a nonhuman animal. As such, it has not been studied by scholars with an interest in animals within biblical texts. This article critically addresses this omission of nonhuman animals from Ruth by locating this neglect within the context of other troubling ideological binaries (such as gender, sexuality, ethnicity, class) which are operative in the narrative. Through an attentiveness to the lack of animals during the famine, harvest, and threshing of the grain in the book, this article suggests that the narrative obscures the crucial contribution of nonhuman animals to society as well as the care they deserve. This therefore indicates how the book of Ruth operates with an anthropocentric human/animal hierarchy whereby nonhumans can be disposed of to advance the interests of humans.

Open Access
In: Biblical Interpretation

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

The apostle Paul’s reaction to the choices of the immoral man and the congregation in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13 is characterized by both urgency and severity. This book explains why Paul’s response to this specific issue was escalated over and above other serious issues. The answer is derived by analyzing the apostle’s concern for the way in which the situation shaped unbelievers’ perceptions of the ecclesia. Paul’s primary focus in his response was how the Corinthians had confused the clear boundaries which demarcated ingroup membership in the ecclesia. Using a social identity perspective as a framework for elucidating Paul’s understanding of group boundedness in Corinth, this social scientific approach seeks to make explicit that which is implicitly embedded in the text by virtue of the social context in which the words were written and received. Paul viewed the ecclesia as a distinct social entity, held together by shared beliefs about how a Christ-follower should live and how a Christ-follower should relate to others. This conceptualization of group boundedness is communicated through implicit assumption, rather than explicit declaration. The development of the ecclesia in Corinth was in a liminal period where identity formation was being undertaken concurrently with the assimilation of new converts and the development of leadership within the community. Established frameworks for forming social identity needed to be set aside in favor of a strategy for social distinction rooted in ethical conformance, in particular the sexual mores of Christ-followers. Paul notes that the moral standard held by the Corinthian Christ-followers does not accord with even gentile standards, in this case, Roman pagans. Some of Paul’s clearest language regarding ingroup/outgroup association is contextualized within the circumstance of the incestuous man in Corinth. The strong incest taboo existent in first-century Roman culture escalated incestuous behavior to a place of greater significance in Paul’s response to the Corinthian ecclesia. Endorsement of incest within the community diminished their capacity to have a redemptive witness in a way that other ethical shortcomings did not. Expulsion was necessary to reclassify the immoral man as an outgroup member. The cultural values of honor, shame and shamelessness deeply informed the apostle’s rationale for expulsion. Derogation and exclusion from the ecclesia were strategic means of producing greater clarity as to the nature and purpose of the ecclesia, both in the perception of its members and the view of outsiders. In seeking to restore the reputational witness of the ecclesia, Paul emphasized the importance of ritual for ingroup identity formation. Baptism and Eucharist alike were strategic means for defining the ecclesia as a distinct group.

In: Urgency and Severity: Pauline Rationale for Expulsion in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Abstract

Jamaica’s 1865 Morant Bay rebellion, now widely recognized as a watershed in the history of the Atlantic world, fundamentally shaped discussions about Jamaica’s political and legal status within the British empire. Here, I analyze a little-known narrative of the rebellion written by Jewish newspaper editor Sidney Levien in pseudobiblical style, with almost every sentence of the account echoing the language of the King James Version of the Bible. I locate Levien’s narrative within a literary tradition that used pseudobiblical style to describe contemporary political life, especially in America. The literary tradition, identified by historian Eran Shalev, transposed contemporary politics into events of biblical proportion. By using pseudobiblical style, Levien advanced a sense of Jamaica’s importance in nineteenth-century political imagination. While many accounts conceptualized the rebellion as a struggle between White landowners and Black laborers, Levien refused to present Jamaica as a White fatherland or a Black republic.

In: Horizons in Biblical Theology
Free access
In: Horizons in Biblical Theology