Home  About us  Contact
 

Early Christians (early + christian)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Humanities and Social Sciences100%

Selected Abstracts

Greetings in the Lord: Early Christians and the Oxyrhynchus Papyri , By AnneMarie Luijendijk

RELIGIOUS STUDIES REVIEW, Issue 3 2010
Michael W. Holmes
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

The Fate of Jewish Historiography after the Bible: A New Interpretation

HISTORY AND THEORY, Issue 2 2004
Amram Tropper
What caused the eventual decline in later Jewish history of the vibrant historiographical tradition of the biblical period? In contrast to the plethora of historical writings composed during the biblical period, the rabbis of the early common era apparently were not interested in writing history, and when they did relate to historical events they often introduced mythical and unrealistic elements into their writings. Scholars have offered various explanations for this phenomenon; a central goal of this article is to locate these explanations within both the immediate historical setting of Roman Palestine and the overarching cultural atmosphere of the Greco-Roman Near East. In particular, I suggest that the largely ahistorical approach of the rabbis functioned as a local Jewish counterpart to the widespread classicizing tendencies of a contemporary Greek intellectual movement, the Second Sophistic. In both cases, eastern communities, whose political aspirations were stifled under Roman rule, sought to express their cognitive and spiritual identities by focusing on a glorious and idealized past rather than on contemporary history. Interestingly, the apparent lack of rabbinic interest in historiography is not limited to the early rabbinic period. Throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, Jews essentially did not write their political, diplomatic, or military history. Instead, Jews composed "traditional historiography" which included various types of literary genres among which the rabbinic "chain of transmission" was the most important. The chain of transmission reconstructs (or fabricates) the links that connect later rabbinic sages with their predecessors. Robert Bonfil has noted the similarity between this rabbinic project and contemporary church histories. Adding a diachronic dimension to Bonfil's comparison, I suggest that rabbinic chains of transmission and church histories are not similar though entirely independent phenomena, but rather their shared project actually derives from a common origin, the Hellenistic succession list. The succession list literary genre, which sketches the history of an intellectual discipline, apparently thrived during the Second Sophistic and diffused then into both rabbinic Judaism and early Christianity. Thus, even though historiography was not terribly important to the early rabbis or to most Second Sophistic intellectuals, the succession list schematic, or the history of an intellectual discipline, was evaluated differently. Rabbis and early Christians absorbed the succession list from Second Sophistic culture and then continued to employ this historiographical genre for many centuries to come. [source]

Early Christianity and the Discourse of Empire in the First Three Centuries CE

RELIGION COMPASS (ELECTRONIC), Issue 3 2010
Chris Frilingos
Did the setting of the Roman Empire make a difference to the way that early Christian texts defined or, more precisely, invented the religion of Christianity? If so, are traces of this difference perceptible in the writings of early Christians? The scholarship assembled here, generally speaking, answers both questions affirmatively: the context of empire affected the way that early Christians talked about themselves, others, and the world they inhabited. The study of the self-definition of early Christians, this research contends, cannot be undertaken without recognizing the distinctive kinds of knowledge (of Self and Other) engendered by the ascendancy of the Roman Empire. The work is separated out under three rubrics: spectacle, borderlines, and mimicry. These categories reflect patterns that have emerged in the study of early Christian texts as they contributed to, appropriated, refracted, and resisted the discourse of empire in the first three centuries of the Common Era. [source]

Eschatological Images of Prophet and Priest in Edward Schillebeeckx's Theology of suffering for Others

THE HEYTHROP JOURNAL, Issue 1 2002
Elizabeth K. TillarArticle first published online: 16 DEC 200
Eschatological images of Jesus as found in Jewish and Christian texts constitute the foundation of Edward Schillebeeckx's positive orientation to suffering for others. Jewish prototypes provided the early Christians with an understanding of Jesus' suffering, death, and resurrection as the advent of the eschaton. The pre-existing biblical figures, which early Jewish Christians appropriated in the aftermath of the devastating crucifixion, provided traditional categories through which the life and death of Jesus could be meaningfully interpreted. Jesus as the eschatological prophet-martyr and Jesus as the suffering, eschatological high priest of the Epistle to the Hebrews are the most prominent and complex of the ancient figures. In Schillebeeckx's analysis, each of the two composite titles ascribed to Jesus is an amplification of a prophetic or priestly prototype. The use of both models is predicted on Jesus' compassionate and redemptive response to suffering , healing the sick, comforting the bereaved, giving hope to the oppressed, and proclaiming eschatological salvation. Schillebeeckx's historical-critical investigation of Jesus' perception of his anticipated death, as revealed in the Last supper narrative, and his analysis of the meaning ascribed to the crucifixion in primitive Christianity establish the basis for a theology of redemptive suffering in the early church. Schillebeeckx has critically examined three pre- New Testament interpretations applied to Jesus' crucifixion: (1) the death of the eschatological prophet-martyr in the Deuteronomic tradition of the prophets whose proclamations were typically misjudged by Israel; (2) the fulfilment of the divine scheme of salvation through the suffering of the ,righteous one', who is ultimately exonerated by God; and (3) a vicarious, atoning sacrifice (the Jewish prototype that later influenced Anselm's substitution theory). The interpretative categories examined by Schillebeeckx with respect to the crucifixion are closely related to the biblical images upon which his theology of suffering is based. [source]