مشخصات کتاب

The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in Its Social and Political Context

دسته بندی: فرهنگی
ویرایش:  
نویسندگان: Michael Peppard  
سری:  
ISBN (شابک) : 0199933650 
ناشر: Oxford University Press 
سال نشر: 2012 
تعداد صفحات: 302 
زبان: English 
فرمت فایل : PDF (درصورت درخواست کاربر به PDF، EPUB یا AZW3 تبدیل می شود) 
حجم فایل: 3 مگابایت 

کلمات کلیدی مربوط به کتاب پسر خدا در جهان روم: پسری الهی در زمینه اجتماعی و سیاسی آن: جامعه شناسی دین، تاریخ دین، تثلیث، شخص دوم، مسیحیت، گراند، فلسفه، واقعیت، مبانی، اساس واقعیت، اشخاص در خدا، توحید، شرک، بت پرستی، رئل، دین، تاریخ، تثلیث، تسلط، شخص، الهی و انسانی، شخص، انسان شناسی فلسفی، انسان شناسی، فلسفی

در صورت تبدیل فایل کتاب The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in Its Social and Political Context به فرمت های PDF، EPUB، AZW3، MOBI و یا DJVU می توانید به پشتیبان اطلاع دهید تا فایل مورد نظر را تبدیل نمایند.

توجه داشته باشید کتاب پسر خدا در جهان روم: پسری الهی در زمینه اجتماعی و سیاسی آن نسخه زبان اصلی می باشد و کتاب ترجمه شده به فارسی نمی باشد. وبسایت اینترنشنال لایبرری ارائه دهنده کتاب های زبان اصلی می باشد و هیچ گونه کتاب ترجمه شده یا نوشته شده به فارسی را ارائه نمی دهد.

توضیحاتی درمورد کتاب به خارجی

Imagine yourself in the fi rst century, a Jewish resident of the burgeoning Roman Empire. Perhaps you live in Rome itself, the eternal city. Or perhaps you live in Alexandria, that other bastion of high culture around the Mediterranean. If you live in Jerusalem, your perspective is slightly diff erent, as the Roman military presses in on you from all sides. From there, it seems like the world is about to end. Regardless of exactly where you live, you have a diff erent perspective on the cosmos, a diff erent worldview, than that of a modern Western person. You are not an autonomous individual with guaranteed liberties, but your entire life transpires as a subject of an empire. You have never actually seen your emperor, but you know a great deal about him. You have heard stories about him from everyone, about what he says and does, about what his childhood was like, about his many triumphs. You know his face from coins and the faces of his whole family from statues; you know them almost as well as your own. In fact, in this era before mirrors in every room, you probably know his face better than your own. He is the most famous, the most powerful person in the world. But there is someone else, also whom you have never seen, that you know even better than the emperor. You fi rst heard of Jesus from people who actually did know him. Th ey told you all kinds of stories about him, too many to remember, accounts of what he said and did, about his tragic end and his glorious appearing. You believe the stories, they give you life, and you want to share the stories with as many people as you can. You decide to write a narrative. But where do you begin? You don’t know about his childhood or what he looked like. You met his brother once—maybe he looked a bit like him? Th en again, you think of yourself also as his “brother.” Th ose who knew him passed on his chief teachings, and they proclaimed him as the “son of God.” He prayed to his “father” and inaugurated a new “family” of God. You believe this and you live by it, but believing and living are diff erent than narrating. Again, where do you begin? One main problem you have, as a Jew, with portraying God’s “son” is that your God does not have a partner. For this reason, among others, your God is unusual in the Roman world. But if the paternal God does not procreate, how do you portray the divine sonship of Jesus? Again, where do you begin? Put yourself in Mark’s shoes—how do you narrate the life of God’s son? The chief objectives of this book are (1) to critique the conceptual framework within which the term “son of God” has usually been construed in biblical scholarship and (2) to reinterpret divine sonship in the sociopolitical context of early Christianity. Th e method by which I resurrect the metaphor works toward both objectives simultaneously. It is a well-known method but has not yet been applied to this topic—namely, to interpret a concept by examining the social practices with which that concept interacts. Concepts, especially metaphors, are almost always rooted in practices. Human beings do not think in isolation from their cultural practices: the metaphor of divine father-son relations only means in the context of actual father-son relations. Yet actual father-son relations have rarely been examined as a way to understand divine sonship. Examining social practices from the fi rst and second centuries allows us to critique a conceptual framework drawn from later eras, which is exactly what chapter 1 sets out to do. Chapter 1 , “Divine Sonship Before Nicea: Biblical Scholarship on ‘Son of God,’ ” argues that scholarship on divine sonship in the New Testament has relied anachronistically on the philosophical and theological categories of fourth-century Christianity, especially the key distinction, “begotten not made.” In the Roman world before Nicea, begetting and making sons was not primarily a philosophical distinction. On the contrary, the father-son relationship was at the heart of all Roman social relationships—the crux of Roman kinship and politics. My argument critiques the Nicene approach to biblical texts, which is oft en an unconscious combination of fourth-century Christological categories with fi rst-century texts. It further assesses what can be gained for the study of divine sonship from narrative, historical-critical, and audience- oriented methods. My own approach is characterized by a concern for social practices, an ear for political ideology, and a focus on the singular fi gure of the Roman emperor. The next two chapters break down the term “son of God” into its constitutive concepts. In order to think diff erently about divine sonship in early Christianity, we need to acknowledge the shift s in scholarly perspective on divinity (“god”) and family (“son”) in the Roman world. Th e fi gure of the emperor—the fi rst famous “son of god” in the Roman Empire—lies at the heart of the changes in perspective. Chapter 2 , “Divinity and Divine Sonship in the Roman World,” engages scholarship on divinity in Roman religion, with special attention to signifi cant studies of emperor worship. Recent work in Roman history and religious studies has critiqued previous modern understandings of ancient divinity as being mistakenly grounded in elite philosophical ideas. Th e use of archaeological research and nuanced theories of power has allowed scholars to incorporate into a coherent worldview some previously anomalous data—not least the widely attested worship of the Roman emperor as a god. Taken together, the changes in the study of Roman religion and emperor worship have invited fresh comparisons with early Christianity and the worship of Jesus Christ. Chapters 4 and 5 will fi ll out some of those comparisons. Chapter 3 , “Begotten or Made? Adopted Sons in Roman Society and Imperial Ideology,” investigates father-son relationships in the Roman family, emphasizing the practices of adoption and inheritance among elites. In the Roman worldview, sonship did not primarily point backward to begetting, but forward to inheritance, oft en through the medium of adoption. For emperors, this observation is especially crucial, since these “fathers” of the Empire had no small trouble propagating their family lines through natural begetting. Th ese divine fathers usually had to adopt their divine sons. Th erefore, I analyze the transmission of power from father to son in the imperial family and the competing family ideologies of natural (“begotten”) sons and adopted (“made”) sons. My analysis shows that scholarship on divine sonship has been hampered by mistaken assumptions about adopted sons. Far from being second-class family members, they were pivotal and oft en favored. Th e adoption of adult males helped to stabilize ruling families and formed a key part of imperial ideology. When read in the light of Roman social practices, emperor worship, and imperial ideology, several early Christian texts take on new meaning. We can hear new resonances in the same old texts. One of these “same old texts” is the Gospel of Mark, which has long been linked to Rome and has sometimes been read in connection with Roman political ideology. Chapter 4 , “Rethinking Divine Sonship in the Gospel of Mark,” demonstrates the ways in which Mark’s image of Jesus and his followers interacts with that of the Roman emperor and the imperial family. Th e practice of adoption in the political ideology leading up to Mark’s era allows us to reimagine his Christology in unexpected ways. Reading the baptism of Jesus through the lens of imperial ideology encourages one to hear the divine voice as an adoption, the beginning of Jesus’ accession as a son and heir. Th e dove functions as an omen of this grace and counter-symbol to the eagle, which was a public portent of divine favor and election in Roman culture. Th e adoptive relationship can be traced later in the gospel and understood to relate to the divine sonship off ered by God to all people through the Spirit. Based on the arguments of chapter 3 , I contend that the supposedly “low” connotations of such an adoption are a misconstrual of ancient evidence. Viewed in its Roman sociopolitical context, Mark’s Christology was as high as humanly possible. When facing the novel challenge of narrating the divine sonship of a human being—in relation to a God that did not procreate—Mark craft ed a portrayal that was theologically coherent and also resonated in its cultural context. The resurrected metaphor enables us to read Mark anew. Th e arguments of chapters 1 through 4 try to take the reader back before Nicea to the fi rst and second centuries. What options had been available for characterizing and narrating divine sonship? Th e book concludes by bringing the reader forward from the Christologies of the New Testament all the way through to Nicea, the triumphant philosophical Christology. Chapter 5 , “Begotten and Adopted Sons of God—Before and Aft er Nicea,” synthesizes a broad range of texts in order to show the shift ing relationship between begotten and adoptive metaphors during the fi rst four centuries of Christianity. Th ese texts anchor the previous chapter’s interpretation of Mark’s Christology, while they also show how the resonance of “son of God” changed over time. Many authors of the fi rst and second centuries, when describing the divine sonship of Christ and Christians, mixed the begotten and adoptive metaphors. But by the fourth century, adoption was no longer a crucial, visible component of imperial ideology and thus lost some (but not all) of its appeal as a metaphor of power and exaltation. Moreover, with the predominance of philosophical categories among Christian leaders, the terms “begotten” and “made” changed in meaning: they ceased functioning as metaphors linked to human practices. Th ey became increasingly abstract concepts, until the watershed debates of the Nicene era established them fi nally as the property of theologians alone. Jesus was now the begotten one, and everything else was made—and made now meant “created,” not “adopted.” By the time of the fourth-century controversies, adoption had become the Christological idea non grata among bishops and other theologians. Th e chapter is roughly chronological and thus offers a clear view of several interweaving themes on the road to Nicea: begotten and adoptive metaphors of divine sonship; the sonship of Christ and the sonship of Christians; Christ as unique and Christ as exemplar; philosophy and narrative; theological doctrine and liturgical practice. In the end, with revised understandings of several ancient phenomena—especially divine status, adoption, and baptism—this book aims toward an ambitious goal: to rethink the Son of God in the Roman world. ■ C H R I S T O L O G I C A L Q U E S T I O N S While working on this book, I encountered more than a few quizzical expressions when I explained its topic, especially if I was speaking with colleagues educated in Christian theology. I would explain that I was examining Jesus’ status as son of God, as expressed by a selection of early Christian texts, in relation to the divine sonship of the Roman emperors, who were usually adopted. Furthermore, I was bringing that knowledge to bear on the understanding of Christian divine sonship developing in the fi rst few centuries of theology and ritual practice. Th en came the reply: “Do you think Mark was adoptionist?” or “Are you doing an Arian reading of early Christian texts?” Depending on who was asking, the question was accompanied by either (a) raised eyebrows and a confused look that said, “Good luck,” or (b) squinted eyes and a steely glare that said, “Get away from me, you heretic.” Th ere is some measure of intrigue at being accused of heresy; paradoxically, the label sounds both ancient and urgent at the same time. I think it is inaccurate, however, and I would rather it did not stick. I feel compelled to provide some defense of my topic in advance. First, I do not think that Mark was an adoptionist, at least not in any sense of the word commonly in use. Second, I am not doing an Arian reading of early Christian texts, as if I were some Arian pastor doing sermon preparation for a long-lost branch of Christianity. But both of these accusations do provide opportunities to discuss what I am actually doing in this book. I try to understand the Roman worldview of divine status and divine sonship and also the singular role of the emperor fi gure in that worldview. Th ese points of emphasis allow me to articulate a new way (as far as I am aware) of understanding the metaphor of adoption in early Christianity, specifi cally by grounding it in the actual adoptive practices and concomitant family ideology of the Roman Empire. In chapters 1 , 2 , and 3 , I hope the reader will see where biblical scholarship has fallen short in its analysis of ancient “son of God” concepts and how scholarship on Roman religion and social practices can help chart a new path. Th rough the arguments of chapters 4 and 5 , I hope the reader will come to imagine why certain manifestations of Christology—now labeled pejoratively as “low” or “adoptionist”— might have resonated culturally with many Christians in the Roman world. I ask my readers to try to read part of the Gospel of Mark anew, in a diff erently emphasized historical context. Mark’s ingenuity in craft ing the fi rst narrative Christology ought to be understood independently, rather than in contrast to other “high” narrative Christologies or in the terms of later theological debates. Therefore, my readings of Mark and other ante-Nicene texts are neither Arian nor proto-Arian nor crypto-Arian. What I want to emphasize is the irrelevance of fourth-century philosophical concerns to the milieu of fi rst-century Christianity. My readings of the early texts attempt to imagine nascent Christology before the cosmologies of the Nicene era were relevant. In the third and fourth centuries, when these cosmologies do become relevant, the understanding of divine sonship changes accordingly, as I elaborate in my fi nal chapter. By this book I do not intend to make any criticism of or contribution to systematic or constructive Christian theology. Th e Gospel of Mark and most of the other texts I interpret play limited roles in those enterprises anyway. Rather, I intend to off er historically informed and, I think, new interpretations of these texts for scholars of the New Testament and early Christianity, while hopefully adding analysis of some benefi t to Roman historians along the way. Th ese interpretations will stand or fall based on their appeal to the practitioners of historical-critical methods. If theologians want to consider them, that is their prerogative, but it is not my intention. In any case, whether theologians consider my arguments or not, they should have nothing to fear from them. Th e early Christian perspective on Jesus’ divine sonship did change over time, but this fact should not impede theological discourse or orthodox faith. As Raymond Brown once affi rmed: “orthodox Christians need have no confl ict with such a thesis of a growing retrospective evaluation of Jesus, provided it is understood that the evaluation involves an appreciation of a reality that was already there—Jesus was who he was during his lifetime, even if it took his followers centuries to develop a partially adequate theological vocabulary in which to articulate his greatness.” 1 ■

فهرست مطالب

Preface ix
Acknowledgments xi
Introduction 3
1 Divine Sonship Before Nicea: Biblical Scholarship on
“Son of God” 9
2 Divinity and Divine Sonship in the Roman World 31
3 Begotten or Made? Adopted Sons in Roman Society
and Imperial Ideology 50
4 Rethinking Divine Sonship in the Gospel of Mark 86
5 Begotten and Adopted Sons of God—Before and Aft er Nicea 132
Conclusion 173
Epilogue: Th e Son of God in the Christian World 177
Abbreviations 1 81
Notes 1 83
Bibliography 249
Subject Index 269
Index of Ancient Sources 282
Index of Modern Authors 2 88

نظرات کاربران

کتاب های مرتبط

دانلود کتاب The billionaire raj

دانلود کتاب Dirt: The Filthy Reality of Everyday Life

دانلود کتاب Cultural Revolution in Iran: Contemporary Popular Culture in the Islamic Republic

دانلود کتاب Elements of Culture: An Applied Perspective

دانلود کتاب Late Ancient Knowing: Explorations in Intellectual History

دانلود کتاب Heilig en Profaan. 1000 Laatmiddeleeuwse Insignes

دانلود کتاب Cultural Heritage Care and Management: Theory and Practice

دانلود کتاب The Body as Capital: Masculinities in Contemporary Latin American Fiction

دانلود کتاب What Is The West?

دانلود کتاب Chic Ironic Bitterness