SQ #12

Which English version of the Bible do you use for the following: preaching, teaching, group devotional, personal devotional, easy reading, quoting in letters? Why?

 The Bible Version that I’m using is the New International Version. Because it is more understandable than the other versions. I als0 used the King James Version before, but because some of the members can not understand it, I prefer to use the NIV Bible.

Some of my members said that KJV for them is like a tongue twister, because of the English term that they used to it.

I’m also using New International Version Bible during my bible studies, and it is because the version of the common bible we are using in our church.

Whatever version we may have, the important thing there is we read our bible and we  can be able to understand it.

SQ #11

Which do you consider to be the most important principle of interpretation? Why?

The most important principle of interpretation for me is the Christological Principle. Since both the old testament and the new testament point to Christ, He is the central focus of the Scripture.

The old testament is seeking or waiting for the coming Messiah, and the new testament is the fulfillment of that prophecy. Jesus came to the earth for a purpose, Christ is the one who died on the cross because fo our sins instead of us. He is our redeemer. He reconciled us to God.

The gospel tells us about His earthly ministries and activities. It is also very much important to learn the meaning or theological significance of His earthly activities, especially His death and his resurrection.

JOURNAL ARTICLE #5

The Gospel according to Judas: Myth and Parables 

 Richard Walsh was an Irish Fianna Fáil politician. He was first elected to Dáil Éireann as a TD for the Mayo South constituency in the September 1927 general election. He was re-elected at each subsequent election until he lost his Dáil seat in the 1943 general election, he was however elected by the Administrative Panel of the 4th Seanad. He regained his Dáil seat in the 1944 general election and remained a member of the lower house until his retirement in 1951.  

Biblical Interpretation: A Journal of Contemporary Approaches

Volume 14

Number 1-2

2006  

Table of Contents:

•  
  • Gospel of Judas
  • Film Judases: Retelling the Gospel
  • Visual Judas: Interpreting the Tradition
  • Judas Motivation: Modernizing the Tradition
  • Mything Judas: Film’s Religious Work
  • The Gospel according to Judas again: A four fold canon
  • Reading otherwise: Parables of Judas
  • Jesus Movies Cited
  • Bibliography  

Jesus films improve the Judas story by adding plot connections and amplifying Judas’ character, but their Judases reprise “the Gospel according to _” pattern. Like Jewison’s Judas, they all are part of the adoring Christian chorus. Films’ selective uses of the gospel Judas incidents intensify the gospel exclusions. Judas remains the traitorous disciple who deserves his fate. Films’ visuals continue the iconography of art and create interlocking scenes associating Judas with Jesus’ opponents. While some films motivate Judas traditionally, others modernize Judas’ motivation in order to create a simulacrum of a modern person. Regardless, Judas remains the mythic other whose exclusion separates us from the evil that we do not wish to accept as part of our self-identity. Films’ Judases define what “we” are not. We can arrange the Judases of Jesus films into four types: a traditional Judas, a modern, human Judas, a Christ-figure Judas, and a parabolic Judas. The first two Judases are clearly part of Christian myth-making. While the Christ-figure Judas may suggest an antimyth opposing the Christian myth, it ultimately supports Christian mythology as well. Only the parabolic Judas contests the continuing power of Christian discourse by telling stories alongside “the gospel” story. The parables of Arcand’s Daniel and Jones’s Brian suggest a view askew on Christian discourse that invites us to read other Jesus films and the gospels themselves parabolically and to find the evil lurking and the “dark night of story” within Christian mythology.

JOURNAL ARICLE #4

The Rejected Jesus and the Kingdom Sayings

Pheme Perkins

Born in Louisville KY in 1945. Lived in Boston area since 1946; educated in Weston public school and at The Winsor School; taught at Boston College since 1972. Married. Roman Catholic. Volunteered in various parish jobs since 1967, current interests: adult education, RCIA, lectors.

SEMEIA:

An experimental Journal for Biblical Criticism:

The historical Jesus and the rejected gospels

Volume 44

1988

  Table of Contents:

• Goal of the Essay

• Kingdom of God as symbolic reality

  •             Kingdom of God as symbol

  •             The shifting language of the Kingdom

  •             Kingdom as “canon”

• Kingdom sayings in the gospel of Thomas

  •             Sayings and the Canonical Process

  •             “Kingdom” in the gospel of Thomas sayings

• Kingdom sayings in the Apocryphon of Thomas

  •             The quest for an appropriate canon

  •             Kingdom in Apocrypha of James

• Kingdom saying as Authoritative Speech

  •             Characteristics of kingdom sayings and the Apocryphon of James

  •             Kingdom sayings in the community

  

Jesus’ kingdom sayings could serve as a “canon”, which set apart Christians as those preserved and interpret the core symbol of “Kingdom of God”. Interpretation of the beatitudes illustrates the process. Jesus’ messianic proclamation comes to serve as eschatological paraenesis in the Matthean tradition; as sapiental direction for how to live in the Lucan tradition, and as a vision of the primordial order or creation recovered by the true disciple in the gospel of Thomas. Sayings are expanded and interpreted in the collections which create an “aphoristic dialogue”. The apocryphon of James shows a shift away from the sayings canon toward a “canon” based on books claiming apolistic authority. It’s collection of sayings and parables is more limited than the gospel of Thomas and its interpretation of those sayings has been shaped by the struggle between members of the sect and other communities of authoritative interpretation. The independent lines of interpretation in the gospel of Thomas and apocryphon of James suggest that: Kingdom was widely felt to mark authoritative speech of Jesus; Kingdom sayings are transmitted independently of the “apocalyptic reversal” typical of the Q tradition; Kingdom can refer to the reality of salvation as recovery of a primordial dimension of reality and is not initially oriented toward paraenesis in view of future reward.

JOURNAL ARTICLE #3

Rain on a land where no one lives:

The Hebrew bible on the Environment

 Gene M. Tucker is professor of Old Testament emeritus at Candler School of Theology, Emory University, has been elected president of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL), one of the oldest learned societies in the United States. A member of the Candler faculty for twenty-four years, Tucker has previously served as chair of a number of SBL task forces and was a member of the Old Testament Committee for the Revised Standard Version Bible. He also is the author, co-author, or editor of eighteen books and the author of more than sixty journal articles and reference works. 

Journal of Biblical Literature

Volume 116

Number 1

1997 

Table of Contents:

•  
  • Posing the Question
  • Creation: Genesis 1-3
  • Culture and Nature
  • Human Limits 

All the Hebrew Traditions assume that the human beings, who are both in and of the world, have a distinctive place in creation. Even in the text that emphasizes the identification of humanity with the rest of the world, and where a hierarchical structure seems under fire, human beings are the ones addressed by God or speak to God. Consistently, this special human role emphasizes responsibility and not rights. Even those words of Psalms 8, which have tended to elevate human self-understanding, are set in the context of awe before creation and acknowledge of human faculty. The Biblical affirmation of human dominions is to speak normatively-realistic, consistent with both ancient and modern experiences. It is true that the human race has the power to mold and change the environment. That it is to deny that power and its concomitant responsibility and withdraw or attempt to is as dangerous as over reaching ones authority. So the Biblical tradition emphasizes both responsibility and the limits of authority. The Biblical world of view is not so much anthropocentric as Theo centric. That is why it speaks of creation and not nature. The world is good because it is God’s creation, not because distinct from the world. To be sure, the biblical God of creation is no less difficult to comprehend that the God who acts in history, for the one who brings the rain is believed to be responsible for withholding it, for sending too much. Nevertheless, the question of the ultimate origin, meaning and destiny of the world deserves to be considered, even in public discourse about the environment.

JOURNAL ARTICLE #2

The Madness of King Jesus:

Why was Jesus put to death, but His followers were not? 

Justin J. Meggitt

He is a University Senior Lecturer in the Study of Religion and the Origins of Christianity, Institute of Continuing Education, University of Cambridge, and Fellow and Director of Studies in Theology and Religious Studies, Hughes Hall. 

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

Volume 29

Number 4

June 2007 

Table of Contents: 

• Starting the Conundrum

• The Madness of Jesus

• A Slight but important Digression: was Jesus actually mad?

• Making sense of Madness

• Perceptions and Responses to Madness

• Two Cases of Madness: Carabas and Jesus ben Ananias

• Judging Jesus Mad: Concluding Remarks

• References

This is a paradox, right at the heart of current reconstruction of the historical Jesus. If Jesus was put to death by the Romans as a Royal Pretender, why were none of His followers killed of even pursued? From everything that the Roman policy concerning the treatment of Royal Pretenders or leaders of seditious movements, this failure to kill Jesus followers, or even pursue them is perplexing to say the least. Although the information that we posses about false figures raises a number of critical problems that do not need to be rehearsed. It is important at this point to note that we are dealing with the Romans behavior towards royal pretenders and seditious leaders, and what we determine of imperial policy and practice. The notion that the Roman authorities would kill a royal pretender but not to bother to persecute those who publicly supported him, as a warning to others, seems to go against what we can discern of both the general practice and principles of Roman rule. The accusation that Jesus was mad is hardly new. Mark’s gospel provides us with the early tradition that Jesus own family thought him so and even went so far as to try to restrain him. All the gospel contain the accusation that Jesus was possessed, a judgment that could be taken as amounting to more or less the same thing. The accusation that he was drunkard, even a false prophet, could legitimately be seen as evidence that he was thought deranged by his contemporaries. The Author said that this article is not about whether Jesus actually was mad, by any objective criteria, he would like to make it clear that he was not saying that it is illegitimate to try to investigate the psychology of the historical Jesus.Although the author made a case for the possibility that Jesus was perceived by the Romans to be a madman, he said that, “we are no closer to knowing why he was put to death”. It is customary to assume that a significant event must have a significant cause

JOURNAL ARTICLE #1

Safekeeping, Borrowing, and Rental

 David L. Baker Acting Director of Academic Operations and Learning Associate Supervises academic staff including area coordinators, project assistant, digital technician, assistants in instruction, lab/research technicians, and Olin Arts Center building staff. Manages the academic department and program budgets, and administers the faculty conference travel budget and the Pilot Fund for Support of Faculty Scholarship. Acts as liaison to Physical Plant for the faculty and staff reporting to the DOF. Identifies, conducts and/or coordinates the professional development of academic staff to meet the needs of the faculty for administrative services, and coordinates the scheduling and coverage of work during each academic year, breaks, and summer periods. Administers the Mellon CBB Collaborative Faculty Development Grant.

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

Volume 31

Number 1

Year: 2006

Table of Contents:

·        Ancient Near Eastern Law

·        Biblical Law

·        Goods Entrusted For Safekeeping

·        Animals Entrusted For Safekeeping

·        Borrowed or Rental Animals

·        Comparison

·        Abbreviations Of Ancient Near Eastern Law Collections

·        Bibliography

In general, a person who is entrusted with someone else’s property—whether for safekeeping, borrowing, or rental—is expected to take good care of it. On the basis of this assumption, provisions are made in various ancient law collections for dealing with problems that may arise: for example, the loss or damage of such property. This article examines the laws on care of other people’s property in the ancient Near East and the Old Testament, especially Exod. 22.7-15 (Heb. 22.6-14), showing that they have much in common, but also that there are significant differences. One particular feature of biblical law which distinguishes it from other ancient (and modern) laws is its emphasis on borrowing, without payment, rather than rental. This may be compared with the laws on interest-free loans in the Old Testament, which are also unique in the ancient Near East.

BI 151: SQ#10

SQ: #10

Are any of the characteristics of the liberal scholars’ approach to bible valid? Explain.

No, the approach of the Liberal Scholars’ to the Bible are not valid. Because they said that the scientific outlook and method are to be applied to the Bible. They also said that the Bible is basically a human book which contains human insight into religious truth rather than divine disclosure. The value of Scripture is determined by the moral and ethical level as revealed in Jesus.  The interpretation of Liberal Scholars’ about the Bible is also based on the evolutionary presuppositions. They said the Bible does not contain special divine revelation but a record of primitive and childlike religious belief. The approach of the Liberal Scholars’ are also invalid because they said that Paul and the Apostles were the real founder of Christianity instead of Jesus Christ. Their interpretation of the Bible has been shifted to the development of the literature instead of the environmental background of the revelation. The social cinditions which produced the experiences and truths are studied instead of the needs of  the people which brought forth God’s intervention in history.

BI 151: BR#5.

BR #5:

Biblical Exegesis In The Apostolic Period

Richard Longenecker is a prominent New Testament scholar. For many years he taught at Wycliffe College in the University of Toronto. More recently he was Distinguished Professor of New Testament at McMaster Divinity College. He is now retired. His education includes B.A. and M.A. degrees from Wheaton College, and a Ph.D. from New College in the University of Edinburgh. He was also honored with a D.D. from Wycliffe College. Longenecker is the author of numerous books and over fifty published articles in scholarly and professional journals. He is presently completing a major commentary on Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, to be published by Eerdmans in the “New International Greek Testament Commentary” series. 

Table of Contents:

• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Introduction
  • Jewish Hermeneutics In The First Century
  • Jesus and The Old Testament
  • Early Christian Preaching and The Old Testament
  • Paul And The Old Testament
  • The Evangelists And The Old Testament
  • Hebrews And The Old Testament
  • Jewish Christian Tractates and the Old Testament
  • The Nature of the New Testament Exegesis
• Bibliography
• Index of the Authors
• Index of References

What is the book all about?

The book is all about the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi texts, and new Targums has greatly increased scholarly interest in the relationship between the New Testament and first-century Judaism. This critically acclaimed study by Richard Longenecker sheds light on this relationship by exploring the methods the earliest Christians used to interpret the Old Testament. By comparing the first Christian writings with Jewish documents from the same period, Longenecker helps to discern both the key differences between Christianity and Judaism and the Judaic roots of the Christian faith. 

bi 151 SQ: 9

SQ: 9

Compare and contrast the hermeneutics of Alexandria and Antioch.

HERMENEUTICS OF ANTIOCH:

The interpreter of the Antioch claimed that even though he used the word, he did not really interpret allegorically.

The Antiochenes asked, “Since there are no real events, since Adam was not really Adam, how did death enter the world, and what meaning does our salvation here? Antiochenes insisted on the historical reality of the Biblical revelation. They saw a deeper meaning to Scripture than the literal meaning. They rejected hidden meanings which only Gnotics could comprehend.

Antiochene believed that the prophet himself foresaw both the immediate event which was to come in the history of ancient Israel and the future coming of Christ. Their predictions was both historical and Christocentric.  The Antiochene School held that the Scriptures are the basis of knowledge and not the esoteric Gnosis on which the Alexandrians had placed so much importance.  

HERMENEUTICS OF ALEXANDRIA: 

The interpreter of Alexandria interpreted the words allegorically. 

The Alexandrian interpreters deprived the bible of historical reality. Alexandrians said that Adam was not really Adam, and paradise was not really paradise.