Various approaches to Paul's relationship with the Roman Empire have come to the fore, including those who see Paul's discourse as anti-imperial, pro-imperial, ambiguous towards empire and those who argue that Paul's discourse transcends that of empire. The nature and influence of the Roman Empire are examined, and the various scholarly approaches to Paul's relationship to empire are considered. Romans 13:1-7 is used as a test case to better understand Paul's stance towards the Roman Empire or government authorities in general. (...) Although it has been argued that Paul's stance towards empire was influenced by 'Jewish apocalyptic', in this contribution, it is argued that Paul's eschatology as laid out in his letters rather than 'Jewish apocalyptic' as such is key to understanding the seemingly ambiguous statements about the Roman Empire in his letters. CONTRIBUTION: This article's contribution mainly lies in its approach to understand Paul's relationship to the Roman Empire from the perspective of his own eschatology. Here, traditional understandings of Paul's relationship to empire is put in a larger perspective, which contributes in solving Paul's seemingly ambiguous stance towards Roman authority. (shrink)

Advances in the study of Paul’s anthropology during the past century have been limited, particularly because of dominant theological approaches that leave many unresolved issues regarding the apostle’s understanding of humans. This article introduces a new approach, which grounds Paul’s anthropological discourse in eschatology, and underscores the importance of transformation. Through the application of this new approach, the esō anthrōpos, instantiated in believers through the Holy Spirit, is shown to be the locus of renewal, and to encompass the entire human. (...) A clear understanding of this concept provides support for the postulation of an intermediate state in Paul’s symbolic universe, a claim that is contested by many scholars. (shrink)

A central claim of the Christian faith is that Jesus is not only fully human (and fully God), but that he reveals true humanity to us. This requires that all of our anthropologies, in some way, ground themselves in Christology, providing a ‘Christological anthropology’. Consequently, any Christological anthropology requires some formulation of Christology proper. In light of this, the main contention of the present paper is that one cannot adequately formulate a Christological anthropology without including a pneumatic Christology. The justification (...) for this necessity can be articulated through the concept of fundamental need. The incarnate Logos, Jesus of Nazareth, fundamentally needed the Spirit in the same way that all human persons fundamentally need the Spirit. ‘Fundamental need’, as a technical concept, can help to clarify both the continuity and discontinuity between Jesus’ likeness to all humanity. This does not collapse the ‘who’ of the incarnation into the many ‘who’s’ of humanity since the incarnate Logos always possessed this Spirit as his own Spirit of Sonship, as opposed to how non-divinely hypostasized human persons must receive the Spirit of Sonship by adoption. The distinctiveness and similarity between Jesus and all of humanity can be most clearly seen by paying special attention to the difference between incarnation and indwelling. Thus, by examining incarnation and in-dwelling, as well as introducing fundamental need into theological discourse, the significance of the Spirit for informing both Christology and anthropology will be made clear. (shrink)

This article examined an ecclesiology that has led to the administrative and spiritual subjugation of members of local assemblies as God's will and modus operandi under the New Covenant. The article will help adherents to re-examine the conclusions of the ecclesiology through a careful exegesis of the texts used in support. This article aimed at highlighting to Christians the potential dangers of this ecclesiology. It provided an analysis that can be consulted by any Christian who has been affected by this (...) ecclesiology. This article examined a specific articulation of the teachings supporting a new ecclesiology and its bases in a local assembly in Lusaka, Zambia, during a 're-envisioning' process. The author participated in this process, purchased the videos, transcribed the teachings and used them as his primary research data. The research was based on transcriptions of a series of teachings that were recorded in video format. The author explored key themes in the teachings, identified the texts used in support, examined those texts by critically using the historical-critical method and drew conclusions. A careful examination of the ecclesiology and the texts used as its proof-texts showed that it was based on flawed exegesis of the texts. The ecclesiology extracted from the transcripts was based on grounds other than careful interpretation of the texts used. The outcomes of this study were that proponents of this ecclesiology must find biblical texts that support it, or consider it to be wrongly derived doctrine.CONTRIBUTION: The primary contribution of this article is re-examination of a specific teaching that is purportedly derived from the Bible, through a critical analysis of the texts used in its support. The article fits with the scope of the journal to be a critical forum for theological reflection and praxis. (shrink)