Doing Torah, Imitating Yahweh: A Reconsideration of the Good Samaritan Story

Scholars often puzzle over why the discussion about Torah obedience in Luke 10:25–29 does not appear to fit coherently with the story of the Good Samaritan that follows it (10:30–37). Was this an oversight on Luke’s part, a lack of editorial finesse, or did he have other aims? In this paper, I will argue that the apparent shift in logic, marked by the transformation of the lawyer’s question from ‘Who is my neighbour?’ (10:29) to ‘Who acts as a neighbour?’ (10:36), invites the lawyer to realign his interpretation of Lev 19:18 with the theology of imitatio Dei already present in Leviticus 19: The one who properly fulfills Lev 19:18 does so by imitating Yahweh. Within the context of Luke’s Gospel, moreover, Luke 10:25–37 illustrates how Luke both affirms and expands the terms of Torah obedience such that proper fulfilment of the Mosaic Law requires a disclosure of and participation in the very nature of God.

Missionary theology and the peopling of pre-Columbian America: John Oxenbridge’s “A plea for the dumb Indian” (ca. 1666)

John Oxenbridge was a 17th-century Puritan minister who lived in England, Bermuda, Suriname, Barbados, and New England. During his residence in Suriname, a short-lived English colony, he wrote a missionary treatise he entitled “A plea for the dumb Indian.” The work was never published and survives partially in non-digitalized manuscript form at the Massachusetts Historical Society in Boston. One of the intact portions of the manuscript is a discussion of the settlement of pre-Columbian America. Oxenbridge held that the Native Americans were descended from ancient Scythians, the semi-nomadic and “uncivilized” peoples of the vast Eurasian Steppe, who had entered America through “Anian,” an early modern designation for the region around the Bering Strait. He also thought that two other peoples later settled in pre-Columbian America: Welsh adventurers sailed across the Atlantic but soon intermarried with the Native Americans and disappeared as a distinct people, and some of the lost tribes of Israel entered the New World through Anian. These lost Israelites still survived and continued to observe the Mosaic Law. They never intermarried with the Native Americans; however, they passed on a “tincture of Israels customs” to their Indian neighbors. Oxenbridge’s discussion of the peopling of pre-Columbian America may seem like an antiquarian curiosity of little interest to historians of Christian missions. But for him it remained relevant to the present day. The Welsh migration, which he thought predated Spanish and French colonization, legitimated the English imperial claim in America. More importantly, the presence of lost Israelites in Scythian America would facilitate the conversion of the Native Americans.

Daughters of Zelophehad – Quest for gender justice in land acquisition and ownership

This article studies the resilience of five daughters of Zelophehad in requesting to be allocated the land as their father never had a son. The Mosaic law discriminates women against land allotment or ownership. However, the same law teaches that only God owns the land and the occupants are the custodians. Deuteronomic tradition presents land custodianship as a right dispensed solely at the discretion of the owner, while Leviticus presents land as a resource to be properly managed by the recipients for sustainability. Exodus presents land occupation as a social concern. The patriarchal views of marginalising women from owning the land are challenged by the spirit of the daughters of Zelophehad who challenged the ancient traditional biblical laws with their patriarchal endorsements that restricted them to land ownership.Contribution: Many African societies are still patriarchal, marginalising women from land ownership and occupation. Women in these traditional societies are encouraged to welcome and embrace the spirit of the daughters of Zelophehad by embracing justice education that promotes equality and social justice. They should boldly appear before the authorities to define their marginalisation regarding land possession and ownership. They can enhance their participation in economic growth by taking the risks and forming the strong networks that lead to viable economic partnerships and corporations.

Paul’s Explanation of Christ-Movement Identity in 2 Corinthians 6:14–7:1: A Social Identity Approach

This article deploys a social identity approach to argue that Paul wrote 2 Corinthians 6:14–7:1 as an integral part of 2 Corinthians to elucidate Christ-movement identity at a key point in an integrated letter. First, I will critique arguments that the passage is an intrusion based on its alleged awkward positioning between 6:13 and 7:2, proposing instead that it is carefully sited within the larger unit of 6:11–7:4. Secondly, I will critically analyze arguments that its non-Pauline character is suggested by the language used. Thirdly, I will explain the presence of 6:14–7:1 in 2 Corinthians as a means whereby, at a critical point in his argument, Paul made a positive statement concerning Christ-movement identity for his Corinthian pistoi, that is, the ingroup of Christ-followers who accepted his version of the gospel, as opposed to apistoi. The latter category embraced both idol-worshipping non-Judeans and his Judean opponents in Corinth who advocated a rival identity based on a different gospel linked to the Mosaic law. In relation to Paul’s extended re-application of Israelite Scripture in 6:16–18, I will argue for its decontextualized, indeed “oracular” character in a context where Paul aimed to communicate with actual addressees, most of whom were illiterate non-Judeans.

Whose Ḥaṭṭāʾt? Aaron’s Enigmatic Response to Moses in Lev 10:19

Aaron’s enigmatic response to Moses’ accusation of cultic malpractice in the disposal of the remains of the ḥaṭṭāt (Lev 10:19) has puzzled exegetes since antiquity. Recent interpreters have concluded that it is not possible to understand Aaron’s reasoning and that his response emphasizes the priesthood’s mystique and its claim to a qualified freedom in interpreting Mosaic law. In contrast, I argue that the crux interpretum can be resolved when we pay particular attention to the pronominal suffixes attached to the word חטאת.

Leo Strauss and the Concrete Order of Law

This chapter is dedicated to Leo Strauss’s attempt to recover the medieval Islamic and Jewish conceptions of the prophet as a political founder of the perfect legal order. The chapter situates Strauss’s political theology within the Weimar debate between proponents of legality and defenders of an extra-legal conception of legitimacy. It argues that Strauss turns back to the ancient conception of law as nomos in order to give a philosophical foundation to legality beyond Christian conceptions of legitimacy. Christian political theology has always pivoted around the polemical claim that Mosaic law was “tyrannical” in some way. Strauss’s contribution to Jewish political theology consists in examining Jewish and Islamic prophetology by formulating it in terms of the so-called tyrannical teaching of Platonic political philosophy. The chapter shows that Strauss ultimately held to the view of a profound compatibility and mutual need between the traditions of Greek philosophy and biblical prophecy.

Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church’s (EOTC) use of the law as həgga ləbbunā, “həgga Orit” and “həgga wangle”

The EOTC’s view of the law of God as Həgga Ləbbunā (the law of heart), “Həgga Orit” (the law of Moses) and “Həgga Wangel” (the law of gospel) could be related to Paul’s view of the law in Romans as the law of Conscience, Torah and the law of the Spirit of life. The three expressions of the EOTC’s view of the law can be mapped with Paul’s view of the law as unwritten law of God (2:14–16), Torah (2:17–29) and the law of the Spirit of life (8:2–4) in Romans. The EOTC’s view of the law as “Həgga Ləbbunā” could shed light to better understand Paul’s view of the law as unwritten law given to all humanity (Rom. 2:12–14). Besides, “Həgga Orit” helps to better understand the law of Moses given to Israel with its universal implication because the Ethiopic tradition claims that Ethiopians have received the Torah through the Queen of Sheba. Further, “Həgga Wangel” helps to better understand the continuity between the Torah and the Gospel because the Ethiopic tradition understands that the law of Gospel is a continuation of the Mosaic law rather than making an antithesis of law and Gospel. Therefore, the EOTC’s view of the law contributes to better understand Paul’s view of the law as an alternative reading from the tradition of Ethiopic perspective.