The Signification of Mark 10:45 among Gentile Christians

1997 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adela Yarbro Collins

One of the many contributions that Helmut Koester has made to New Testament scholarship is his attention to the importance of archaeological and epigraphical evidence for the study of early Christianity. I offer this study as a small token of gratitude to him for that contribution. It attempts to show the importance of certain inscriptions for the signification of the saying attributed to Jesus in Mark 10:45: “For the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adela Yarbro Collins

AbstractStudents of early Christianity recognized long ago that the canonical psalms of the Jewish Bible provided a framework of meaning in which the followers of Jesus could make sense of his crucifixion. This novel hermeneutic is evident in the allusions to the Psalms in the passion narrative of the Gospel according to Mark. It appears also in the Markan Jesus's explanation of the need for the Son of Man to suffer. Most students of the New Testament today understand Philippians 2:6-11 as a pre-Pauline hymn that was composed for early Christian worship. More recent studies suggest that it is exalted prose rather than poetry. The hypothesis of this article is that Paul composed it, either for worship or for the purposes of the argument of his letter to the Philippians. In doing so, he adapted a common social practice of the local culture. The "theologos" was an official in the organized worship of an ancient deity whose duty it was to compose brief speeches, sometimes in prose, sometimes in poetry, in honor of the deity. The organized worship of the emperor included such officials. Paul acted as a "theologos" in writing a brief speech in exalted prose honoring Jesus Christ, whom he had taught the Philippians to honor instead of the emperor.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-376
Author(s):  
Mike Duncan

Current histories of rhetoric neglect the early Christian period (ca. 30–430 CE) in several crucial ways–Augustine is overemphasized and made to serve as a summary of Christian thought rather than an endpoint, the texts of church fathers before 300 CE are neglected or lumped together, and the texts of the New Testament are left unexamined. An alternative outline of early Christian rhetoric is offered, explored through the angles of political self-invention, doctrinal ghostwriting, apologetics, and fractured sermonization. Early Christianity was not a monolithic religion that eventually made peace with classical rhetoric, but as a rhetorical force in its own right, and comprised of more factions early on than just the apostolic church.


2003 ◽  
pp. 146-157
Author(s):  
Pavlo Yuriyovych Pavlenko

The study of the origins of the Christian religion has always been one of the most difficult problems. This is due, first of all, to the almost complete absence of specific historical evidence of early Christianity and of its founder, which in turn led to the emergence of the so-called "mythological theory" according to which Christianity emerged "spontaneously" in Palestine and is unknown in any way. F. Engels, who borrowed from Bruno Bauer the date of writing the Book of the Annunciation of John the Theologian, the last book of the New Testament canon, played a significant role in the formation of such views. In accepting this date, understanding of Christianity as a "spontaneous" phenomenon, initially representing the movement of the underprivileged masses of the Roman Empire, played a role. In this sense, any "spontaneity" automatically excluded the historicity of virtually all evangelical characters (according to Engels, all of them are nothing but mythological images). If neither Jesus nor his apostles existed, then the gospel narrative of Christ evolved from the myth of Christ as God to the myth of Jesus as God-man.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document