The essays in this irenic book explore two pervasive New Testament teachings that are foundational to peace: Jesus' commands to love enemies and not to retaliate against those who do evil. These themes are covered from a variety of perspectives, showing the impact of Jesus' teaching throughout the New Testament.
This study examines the varieties and continuities of ethical exhortations and ideals in the Jewish and Christian traditions (c. 200 BCE-100 CE) that fall under the rubric of non-retaliation. One of the principal conclusions of this thought-provoking work is that a critical factor in determining the shape of non-retaliatory ethics is whether the exhortation is applied to relations within the local and/or elect community or to relations with oppressors of the elect community. It becomes apparent also that the non-retaliatory ethic of the NT stands solidly in the tradition of non-retaliatory ethics in Early Judaism.
A GOD OF LOVE AND GENOCIDE? For many Christians the problem of violence in Scripture can result in a crisis of faith--especially when we see how such passages have been used throughout history to justify horrific bloodshed in God's name. Moving beyond typical conservative and liberal approaches, which seek to either defend or whitewash over violence in the Bible, Disarming Scripture takes a surprising yet compelling approach: Learning to read the Bible like Jesus did. Along the way the book deals with some very big issues, ranging from passages commanding genocide and infanticide in the Old Testament to passages in the New Testament that have been used to justify slavery, child abuse, and state violence. The take-away is an approach to Scripture that not only sees questioning as an acceptable part of a healthy faith, but as an absolutely essential part of it.
Although scholars increasingly understand Scripture to contain political dimensions and implications, the interpretation of Scripture is often marginalized in most scholarly discussions of political theology. Reading Scripture as a Political Act takes a step toward remedying this situation by exploring some of the ways the church has read Scripture politically. In particular, this volume examines the political character of premodern and modern theologians’ readings of Scripture with attention to how their readings relate to or address political challenges in their particular social and historical settings. The essays attempt to illuminate the ways that the theological interpretation of Scripture shaped the theopolitical imaginations of Augustine, Basil of Caesarea, Bonaventure, Thomas Aquinas, Bartolome de las Casas, John Wesley, Karl Barth, Henri de Lubac, and John Howard Yoder, among others. Several essays in the volume also take constructive steps and suggest how these models of reading Scripture can inform the contemporary task of reading Scripture in political contexts. The volume covers the earliest Christian centuries to the late modern era, and considers carefully the close coordination between Scripture, theology, and social and political concerns. As a whole, the collection provides a robust survey of Christian theopolitical interpretation of the Bible.
Shrewd and thoughtful, Pyung-Soo Seo offers an exciting and refreshing perspective on Luke's Gospel, which provides valuable clues to a deeper understanding of the vast power of the Roman Empire through Jesus' birth and trial accounts. Seo analyses the political role the Gospel played in the decades following the Crucifixion, and presents a compelling argument: the Bible emphasises Jesus' relationships with tax collectors as a way of displaying his moral authority, seen as he confronts one of the most hated aspects of the empire: the corruption and intimidation for which the emperor was ultimately responsible. Seo suggests that Luke wants us to compare Jesus and the emperor to show us how the emperor is found wanting. Concentrating on the titles of 'benefactor' and 'saviour' his analysis of Christ's moral authority is both discerning and erudite.
Walter Wink's widely acclaimed trilogy from Fortress Press - Naming the Powers 0-8006-1786-X (1984), Unmasking the Powers 0-8006-1902-1 (1993), and Engaging the Powers 0-8006-2646-X (1992) - has sold over 80,000 copies. The Powers are good; the Powers are fallen; the Powers must be redeemed, says Wink; and the illustrious theologians and ethicists in this volume apply this suggestive analysis to economics, politics and government, war and peace, personal ethics and ecological and social justice.Contributors include: Ray Gingerich, Eastern Mennonite University Ted Grimsrud, Eastern Mennonite University Nancey Murphy, Fuller Theological Seminary Daniel Liechty, Illinois State University Walter Wink, Auburn Theological Seminary Willard M. Swartley, Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary Glen Stassen, Fuller Theological Seminary
Is the New Testament inherently violent? In this book a well-regarded New Testament scholar offers a balanced critical assessment of charges and claims that the Christian scriptures encode, instigate, or justify violence. Thomas Yoder Neufeld provides a useful introduction to the language of violence in current theological discourse and surveys a wide range of key ethical New Testament texts through the lens of violence/nonviolence. He makes the case that, contrary to much scholarly opinion, the New Testament is not in itself inherently violent or supportive of violence; instead, it rejects and overcomes violence. [Published in the UK by SPCK as Jesus and the Subversion of Violence: Wrestling with the New Testament Evidence.]
When scholars have set Jesus against various conceptions of the "messiah" and other reemptive figures in early Jewish expectation, those questions have been bound up with the problem of violence, whether the political violence of a militant messiah or the divine violence carried out by a heavenly or angelic figure. Simon J. Joseph enters the wide-ranging discussion of violence in the Bible, taking up questions of Jesus of Nazareth's relationship to the violence of revolutionary militancy and apocalyptic fantasy alike, and proposes an innovative new approach. Missing from past discussions, Joseph contends, is the unique conception of an Adamic redeemer figure in the Enochic material--a conception that informed the Q tradition and, he argues, Jesus' own self-understanding.
Rather than viewing the Apostle Paul's many references to peace and non-retaliation as generalized ethical principles drawn from Paul's background, Jeremy Gabrielson argues that peace and non-retaliation should be understood in relation to Paul's historyof being a violent persecutor of Jesus' followers. After his 'Damascus road' experience, Paul zealously announced the gospel and abandoned his violent ways. His apostolic vocation included calling and equipping assemblies of people whose common in life was ordered by a politics characterized by peaceableness. This political dimension of Paul's gospel, in continuity with the earliest evidence we possess regarding Jesus and his disciples, stands in stark contrast to the politics of both the contemporary Roman imperial power and those who would seek to replace Rome by violent means.
This study offers fresh insight into the place of (non)violence within Jesus' ministry, by examining it in the context of the eschatologically-motivated revolutionary violence of Second Temple Judaism. The book first explores the connection between violence and eschatology in key literary and historical sources from Second Temple Judaism. The heart of the study then focuses on demonstrating the thematic centrality of Jesus’ opposition to such “eschatological violence” within the Synoptic presentations of his ministry, arguing that a proper understanding of eschatology and violence together enables appreciation of the full significance of Jesus’ consistent disassociation of revolutionary violence from his words and deeds. The book thus articulates an understanding of Jesus’ nonviolence that is firmly rooted in the historical context of Second Temple Judaism, presenting a challenge to the "seditious Jesus hypothesis"—the claim that the historical Jesus was sympathetic to revolutionary ideals. Jesus’ rejection of violence ought to be understood as an integral component of his eschatological vision, embodying and enacting his understanding of (i) how God’s kingdom would come, and (ii) what would identify those who belonged to it.
