Roukema sets out to investigate and assess the various views of Jesus in early Christianity, basing his approach on a distinction between historical and theological statements about Jesus.
What happened when the writing of the Old Testament prophet Micah from the 8th century BCE was read and interpreted by Christians in the 1st to 5th century BCE? This research meticulously describes data from patristic commentaries and other ancient Christian works in Greek and Latin, as well as the remains of Gnostic receptions of Micah, and it analyses the interpretative strategies that were adopted. Attention is paid to the partial retrieval of Origen’s Commentary on Micah, which is lost nowadays, but was used by later Christian authors, especially Jerome. This work includes the ancient delimitation of the Septuagint version and patristic observations on the meaning of particular terms. Other aspects are the liturgical readings from Micah’s book up to the Middle Ages, its use in Christ’s complaints about Israel on Good Friday (the Improperia), and a rabbinic tradition about Jesus quoting Micah. It is noted whenever patristic authors implicitly use or explicitly quote Jewish interpretations, many of which are supplied with parallels in contemporaneous or medieval Jewish works. This first comprehensive survey of the ancient Christian reception and interpretation of Micah is a valuable tool for Biblical scholars and historians.
The present volume contains the proceedings of the fourth symposium of the Novum Testamentum Patristicum project (NTP), an international re-search project on the reception history of the New Testament in the early Church. The symposium was held in October 2012 at the University of Leuven. It was organised by Joseph Verheyden, Tobias Nicklas, and An-dreas Merkt, the coordinators of NTP. The topic of the meeting was the reception of the resurrection and empty tomb stories and the development of the belief in resurrection in the early Church.The belief in the resurrection constitutes the core issue of Christianity and of Christian tradition. The earliest references to the resurrection and witnesses to such a belief are found in the canonical gospels and in the letters of Paul, but the topic obviously remained of the utmost importance all through the early Church. Contributions to this volume offer studies on reception of the resurrection and empty tomb stories and the development of the belief in resurrection in the early Church by examining the most important early references on this topic.
What happened when the writing of the Old Testament prophet Micah from the 8th century BCE was read and interpreted by Christians in the 1st to 5th century BCE? This research meticulously describes data from patristic commentaries and other ancient Christian works in Greek and Latin, as well as the remains of Gnostic receptions of Micah, and it analyses the interpretative strategies that were adopted. Attention is paid to the partial retrieval of Origen’s Commentary on Micah, which is lost nowadays, but was used by later Christian authors, especially Jerome. This work includes the ancient delimitation of the Septuagint version and patristic observations on the meaning of particular terms. Other aspects are the liturgical readings from Micah’s book up to the Middle Ages, its use in Christ’s complaints about Israel on Good Friday (the Improperia), and a rabbinic tradition about Jesus quoting Micah. It is noted whenever patristic authors implicitly use or explicitly quote Jewish interpretations, many of which are supplied with parallels in contemporaneous or medieval Jewish works. This first comprehensive survey of the ancient Christian reception and interpretation of Micah is a valuable tool for Biblical scholars and historians.
In Jesus, Gnosis and Dogma Roukema investigates and assesses the various views of Jesus in early Christianity, basing his approach on a distinction between historical and theological statements about Jesus. Historical statements can be arrived at through a critical study of the earliest records, although Roukema recognizes that scholars differ widely here. Theological statements about Jesus are to do with what has been and is believed about him. Roukema demonstrates that Gnostic traditions about Jesus mostly derive from the earlier traditions preserved in the New Testament writings and do not give a more accurate view of the historical Jesus. He shows that the view of Jesus as the divine Lord (Yahweh) and Son of God is inspired by an early Jewish pattern that was exploited by the very first Christians. In spite of some later dogmatic precisions, there is more continuity between the New Testament picture of Jesus and the Nicene creed than between the historical Jesus and the Jesus of early Gnosticism. Even the essence of the Trinitarian dogma appears to have Jewish roots.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.