Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Luke 17'

Luke's record of Paul in Athens is among the most interesting and widely studied topics in the life of the Apostle Paul. Luke recorded that Paul taught in the Athenian marketplace, where he was asked to present his doctrines before the Areopagus. Many have commented on the controversial aspects of Paul's speech before the council as recounted by Luke. Much of this scholarly commentary has been centered on the speech itself and the historical authenticity of the account. The purpose of this thesis is to reexamine the context and the setting of the speech as recorded by Luke in the biblical text. By reexamining the context of the speech, this thesis will help clarify Paul's purpose in engaging in philosophical dialogue with his audience while omitting the profound Christocentric doctrines as found in the Pauline Epistles. This thesis argues that an understanding of the setting and the audience played a pivotal role in the content of the Areopagus speech. Paul's audience was very different than the one he was writing to in his Epistles; therefore, the speech matches the setting and the audience. This thesis demonstrates the significance of the audience by examining Paul's education before his conversion to Christianity, whether Paul was taken before the Areopagus on trial, what the functions of the Areopagus were over its history, where Paul was taken to explain his doctrine, and what role the audience played in how and what Paul taught on that occasion.

The quest for the historical Jesus can be advanced by a consideration of disagreement scenarios recorded in the gospels. Such “conflicts” afford the opportunity not only to analyse the positions of the protagonists, but by comparing them, to better appreciate their relative stances. ¶ One area of disagreement that has remained largely unexplored is that between Jesus and the Pharisees over the “kingdom of God”. Indeed, “kingdom of God” formed the very foundation of Jesus’ preaching and thus ought to be the place where fundamental disagreements are to be found. As Luke 17:20-21 represents the only passage in the Gospels where the Pharisees show any interest in the kingdom of God, it forms the central hub of the thesis around which an account of the disparate beliefs of Jesus and the Pharisees on the kingdom of God is constructed. ¶ The main thesis is this. Luke 17:20-21 can best be explained, at the level of the Pharisees and Jesus, as betraying a fundamental disagreement, not in the identity of the kingdom of God, which they both regarded as primarily the Divine Royal Presence, i.e. God himself as king, but in the location of that kingdom. The Pharisees located the kingdom in the here-and-now, Jesus located it in heaven. Conversely, at later stages in the formation of the pericope, the pre-Lukan community identified the kingdom as the Holy Spirit located in individuals with faith in Jesus and the redactor identified the kingdom as Jesus, located both in the Historical Jesus and the Jesus now in heaven. ¶ Chapter 1, after the usual preliminary remarks, presents an analysis of Luke 17:20-21 as a chreia, a literary form ideally suited as the basis on which to compare the beliefs of the Pharisees and Jesus. The work of three scholars vital to the development of the main thesis is then reviewed and evaluated. By way of background, a portrait of the Pharisees is then presented, highlighting in particular, issues that will be of importance in later chapters. Finally, a section on the Aramaic Targums suggests that some targum traditions may be traced back prior to AD 70 and that these reflect the influence and beliefs of first century Palestinian Pharisees. ¶ Chapters 2 and 3 are a consideration of every instance of the explicit mention of God as king (or his kingship) and the Divine Kingdom respectively, in contemporary and earlier Jewish Palestinian literature and in Luke-Acts. A model of the kingdom of God is developed in these chapters that will be applied to Luke 17:20-21 in the next chapter. ¶ Chapter 4 presents a detailed exegesis of Luke 17:20-21, taking into account scholarship on the pericope since the last monograph (an unpublished dissertation of 1962) on the chreia. It offers a composition history of the pericope and measures previous exegesis against the view of the kingdom of God as developed in chapters 2 and 3. ¶ Chapter 5 presents a summary of the work that relates directly to Luke 17:20-21, some implications arising from the findings and, several possible avenues for future research.

I den här uppsatsen har jag undersökt hur Jesus förkunnelse om Guds rike kan förstås utifrån Lukasevangeliet. Att närstudera ett enda evangelium, och dessutom inte hela evangeliet utan bara fyra perikoper i det, innebär en mycket tydlig avgränsning. Värdet i att försöka förstå vad Jesus säger utifrån denna enskilda sammanhängande källa är att den kan ha ett större djup än en bild som sätts ihop av ett godtyckligt antal fragment från olika källor. I Lukasevangeliet nämner Jesus ordet rike med syftning på Guds rike över 20 gånger fördelat på 18 episoder. Med metoden diskursanalys har jag delat in dessa ställen i tre kategorier som jag kallar diskurs A, B och C. Diskurs A handlar om att Guds rike har högsta prioritet, men beskriver inte riket. Diskurs B beskriver på olika sätt hur Guds rike är. Diskurs C omtalar Guds rike som ett löfte. De fyra perikoper jag analyserar i detalj representerar på olika sätt de diskurser jag identifierat i evangeliet som helhet. Luk 11:1-4 hör till diskurs A, Luk 11:14-23 och Luk 17:20-21 till diskurs B, och Luk 22:24-30 till diskurs C. Traditionen att författaren till dubbelverket Lukasevangeliet och Apostlagärningarna är just Lukas går tillbaka till mitten av 100-talet. Verket utmärks av universalism och en viss syn på rikedom och fattigdom som antagligen kom från författarens församling i Antiochia. Där predikades evangeliet för icke-judar, och där fanns engagemanget i de fattiga och behövande. Det var viktigt att inte fastna i det världsliga livet och lockas att samla rikedomar. Lärjungaskapet skulle vara helhjärtat. När Jesus talar om Guds rike i Lukasevangeliet kan det låta som om det handlar om ett territorium. Men begreppet Guds rike, i grundtexten ἡ βασιλείατοῦΘεοῦ, betyder snarare Guds herravälde. Det är inte ett område eller en plats, utan ett tillstånd som är bestämt av att Gud regerar. Samtidigt är det omöjligt att härska i ingenstans, så det finns ändå ett underförstått territorium i begreppet. Det fanns en dubbelhet i uppfattningen om Guds rike på Jesus tid som innebar att det både var en aktuell tillämplig föreställning på världens aktuella situation och en eskatologisk föreställning. Genom en detaljexegetisk analys av grundtexten för varje perikop har jag nått fram till slutsatser om texternas teologiska budskap om Guds rike. Analysen av Luk 11:1-4 visar att Herrens bön innehåller en indirekt beskrivning av Guds rike som ett idealtillstånd. Gud förutsätts ha makten att få riket till stånd, men människornas vilja och aktivitet spelar också roll. Perikopen Luk 11:14-20 visar att Guds rike är där Gud verkar. Det kan vara här och nu. Gud verkar i Jesus när han befriar en man från en stum demon. Men han verkar inte bara i Jesus utan i alla som gör gott. I perikopen Luk 17:20-21 ställs frågan när Guds rike ska komma, och Jesus svarar på ett sätt som får det att verka inom räckhåll redan i nuet. I Jesus löfte till lärjungarna om jämlik gemenskap med honom själv i sitt eget rike i Luk 22:28-30 jämställer han sig själv med Gud. Han lovar en framtid i härlighet för dem som är honom trogna. Ett försök till syntes av de teologiska budskap som analysen av varje perikop lett fram till är att Guds rike enligt Lukasevangeliet verkar syfta på det alltigenom godas seger över det onda. Begreppet mister dock inte sin mångtydighet och gåtfullhet för det. Det analyserna främst bidrar till är att belysa grundtextens möjliga betydelser, som med nödvändighet begränsas i varje översättning.
In this thesis I have examined how Jesus' proclamation of the kingdom of God can be understood from the Gospel of Luke. A close examination of a single gospel, and moreover not the whole gospel but only four pericopes in it, narrows the scope considerably. The value in trying to understand what Jesus is saying based on this single coherent source is that it can have a greater depth than the picture put together by any number of fragments from different sources. In Luke's Gospel Jesus mentions the word kingdom as referring to the Kingdom of God over 20 times, in a total of 18 episodes. With the method of discourse analysis, I have divided these occurrences into three categories which I call the discourse of A, B and C. Discourse A is about the kingdom of God having the highest priority, but there is no description of the kingdom. Discourse B describes the kingdom of God in some way. Discourse C mentions the kingdom of God as a promise. The four pericopes I analyze in detail, in different ways represent the discourses I have identified in the gospel as a whole. Lk 11:1-4 belong to discourse A, Lk 11:14-23 and Lk 17:20-21 to discourse B, and Lk 22:24-30 to discourse C. The tradition that the author of the double work of Luke-Acts is precisely Luke, goes back to the mid 100's. The work is characterized by universalism and a certain vision of wealth and poverty that probably came from the author's congregation in Antioch. There the gospel to non-Jews was preached, and there was commitment in the poor and needy. It was important not to get caught up in the worldly life and be tempted to accumulate wealth. Discipleship should be wholehearted. When Jesus speaks of the kingdom of God in the Gospel of Luke, it may sound as if it is about a territory. But the concept of the kingdom of God, in the original text ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ means rather God's dominion. It is not an area or a place, but a state that is determined by God's reign. At the same time, it is impossible to rule ”nowhere”, so there is still a territory implicit in the concept. There was a duality in the perception of the kingdom of God in Jesus' time, which meant that it was both a way of conceiving the world's current situation and an eschatological concept. Through a detailed exegetical analysis of the basic text for each pericope I have reached conclusions on the theological message of the kingdom of God in the texts. The analysis of Lk 11:1-4 shows that the Lord's Prayer contains an indirect description of God's kingdom as an ideal state. God is assumed to have the power to bring the kingdom into being, but the human will and activity also plays a role. Pericope Lk 11:14-20 shows that God's kingdom is where God is at work. It can be here and now. God works through Jesus when he frees a man from a dumb demon. But he doesn't only work through Jesus but through all who do good. In pericope Lk 17:20-21 the question of when the kingdom of God will come is asked, and Jesus responds in a way that makes the kingdom seem within reach already in the present. In Jesus' promise to the disciples of equal fellowship with him in his own kingdom in Lk 22:28-30, he equates himself with God. He promises a future of glory for those who are faithful to him. An attempt at a synthesis of the theological messages that the analyses of the four pericopes led to, is that the kingdom of God according to the Gospel of Luke seems to refer to the victory of the perfect good over evil. The concept of the kingdom remains ambiguous and mysterious. What the analyses contribute to is mainly highlighting the possible meanings of the received text, which are inevitably limited in each translation.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2017-09-29T12:34:58Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Victor da Silva Almeida Filho.pdf: 1453247 bytes, checksum: 440494c02418fcfa50c70b51c2a54830 (MD5)
Made available in DSpace on 2017-09-29T12:34:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Victor da Silva Almeida Filho.pdf: 1453247 bytes, checksum: 440494c02418fcfa50c70b51c2a54830 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-09-19
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUCSP
This study is an analysis of the account of Luke 7, 11-17 better known as the resurrection of the son of the widow of Naim. In a first moment the work deals with general questions of the Gospel according to Luke, presenting the structural analyzes of the narrative. So, the pericope of Naim assumes a literary function, serving to complete the answer to the messengers sent by John the Baptist (Lk 7, 18-23) about the identity of Jesus. To prove this, Luke employs the Greek verb σπλαγχνίζομαι, to be moved with compassion, to a widowed woman who was in a situation of vulnerability. We studied the rule for the use of this verb in the pericope as well as its semantic root and its two other occurrences in the Lucan Gospel. For the analysis and interpretation of Lk 7,11-17, analytical elements of contemporary biblical exegetical methodology were used. The research valorized the diachronic studies by making the interface with the synchronic studies and intertextual analyzes, aided by texts of the Magisterium of Pope Francis. The results achieved were a better understanding of the Lucan account, because in using the verb σπλαγχνίζομαι the author does so in a conscious and coherent way towards those who are in a situation of vulnerability and uses their own literary criteria and their particular narrative style
Este estudo é uma análise do relato de Lc 7,11-17, mais conhecido como a ressurreição do filho da viúva de Naim. Em um primeiro momento, o trabalho trata de questões gerais do Evangelho segundo Lucas, apresentando as análises estruturais da narrativa. A perícope de Naim assume uma função literária, completando a resposta aos mensageiros enviados por João Batista (Lc 7,18-23) sobre a identidade de Jesus. Para demosntrar isso, Lucas emprega o verbo grego σπλαγχνίζομαι, “ser movido de compaixão”, para uma mulher viúva que se encontrava em situação de vulnerabilidade. Foram estudados os critérios para o emprego deste verbo na perícope, bem como sua raiz semântica e suas duas outras ocorrências no Evangelho lucano. Para a análise e interpretação de Lc 7,11-17 foram utilizados elementos analíticos da metodologia exegética bíblica contemporânea. A pesquisa valorizou os estudos diacrônicos, fazendo a interface com os estudos sincrônicos e análises intertextuais, auxiliados por textos do Magistério. Os resultados alcançados foram uma melhor compreensão do relato lucano, pois, ao empregar o verbo σπλαγχνίζομαι, o autor o faz de modo consciente e coerente para com os que se encontram em situação de vulnerabilidade e se vale de critérios literários próprios e de seu particular estilo narrativo

PONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO RIO DE JANEIRO
COORDENAÇÃO DE APERFEIÇOAMENTO DO PESSOAL DE ENSINO SUPERIOR
PROGRAMA DE SUPORTE À PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO DE INSTS. DE ENSINO
Esta pesquisa é um estudo e análise do relato de Lc 7,11-17, mais conhecido como a ressurreição do filho da viúva de Naim, procurando entender o sentimento de compaixão de Jesus ao ver a mãe viúva que estava levando seu único filho para ser sepultado. Este sentimento foi definido por Lucas com o emprego do verbo splangxizomai (ser movido de compaixão). Foram estudados os critérios para o emprego deste verbo na perícope e nas demais ocorrências no Evangelho de Lucas. Para a análise e interpretação de Lc 7,11-17 foram utilizados elementos essenciais do método histórico-crítico. Portanto, foi feita a análise diacrônica do texto e, ao analisar a forma com que Lucas emprega o verbo splangxizomai em seu Evangelho, a análise foi sincrônica, considerando o texto em sua forma final e revelando o caminho de provocação do leitor que é desenhado pela estrutura de Lc 7,11-17 ligada ao Evangelho como um todo. Nossa pesquisa valorizou os estudos diacrônicos fazendo a interface com os estudos sincrônicos e análises intertextuais. Os resultados alcançados foram uma melhor compreensão do relato, evidenciando que o fato de Jesus ter sido movido de compaixão diante da mãe viúva resultou na solução do problema. Com a sua palavra Jesus reanimou o jovem morto e o entregou à sua mãe e as multidões reconheceram o episódio co-mo uma visita de Deus ao seu povo. Demonstramos que ao empregar o verbo splangxizomai Lucas o fez conscientemente e coerentemente utilizando critérios literários e com seu próprio estilo narrativo, onde o mesmo funciona como turning point, isto é, como ponto de mutação e serve de modelo para o uso do verbo nas demais passagens do Evangelho (Lc 10,33 e 15,20).
This research is a study and analysis of Lk 7:11-17, well-known as the resurrection of the widow s son at Nain, aiming to understand the feeling of compassion felt by Jesus after seeing the widowed mother on her way to bury her only son. That feeling was well portrayed by Luke by the use of the verb splangxizomai (being moved by compassion). The criteria for the use of this verb in the pericope as well as in the other occurrences in the Gospel of Luke are studied. For the analysis and interpretation of Lk 7:11-17, essential elements of the historical-critic method are used. Thus, a diachronic analysis of the text is made and by analyzing the way Luke uses the verb splangxizomai in his Gospel, the analysis is synchronic, considering the text in its final form and revealing the elements used to provoke the reader, within the structure of Lk 7:11-17 and linked to the Gospel as a whole. Our research values the diachronic studies through their interfacing with synchronic studies and intertextual analyses. The results achieved lead to a better understanding of the narrative, highlighting that the fact of Jesus being moved with compassion by the situation of the widowed mother resulted in the solution of the problem. With his word, Jesus reanimated the dead young man and returned him to his mother. With this, the crowds recognized the episode as a visit of God to his people. We demonstrate that the use of the verb splangxizomai by Luke was conscious and consistent, using literary criteria and his own narrative style, functioning as a turning point, a point of change, and serving as a model for the further use of the verb in other passages of the Gospel (Lk 10:33 and 15:20).

L'elaborato, dopo aver esaminato le modifiche operate dalla legge n. 190 del 2012, svolge una dettagliata analisi della giurisprudenza intervenuta in seguito all'approvazione della riforma.
The paper, after examining the changes made by Law no. 190 of 2012, carried out a detailed analysis of the case law intervened following the approval of the reform.

La tesi si occupa del concetto di “riflessione critica” dell’autore di reato sull’illecito commesso. Secondo l’art. 27 d.P.R. 30 giugno 2000, n. 230, essa consiste in una riflessione dialogica concernente le condotte antigiuridiche e colpevoli, le correlate motivazioni, le conseguenze che discendono per l’autore medesimo e le possibili azioni di riparazione attuabili nella fase di esecuzione. La ricerca si sviluppa in cinque momenti: il primo capitolo focalizza l’attenzione sullo studio di un fondamento costituzionale del concetto di “riflessione critica”, anche al fine di una rinnovata lettura del finalismo rieducativo; il secondo capitolo mette in luce i punti di intersezione tra “riflessione critica” sull’illecito commesso e “teoria generale del reato”; il capitolo successivo offre una panoramica degli ostacoli e dei problemi operativi che impediscono la piena predisposizione di un modello responsabilizzante e che sollecitano ipotesi di riforma del sistema penale e penitenziario; nel quarto capitolo ci si sofferma sull’approfondimento delle premesse di un modello dialogico e riparativo di giustizia; quindi, il capitolo conclusivo si dedica a un’esplorazione dei confini e delle congruenze dei concetti di “rehabilitation” e “restorative justice”, per muovere oltre verso la considerazione di un modello di giustizia ispirato all’idea di “responsività” [John Braithwaite] e di “restorative justice dialogue” [Mark S. Umbreit]. In sostanza, lo studio mira a proporre un modello che faciliti, in modo dialogico e inclusivo, forme di responsabilità attiva nel settore penale.
The dissertation examines how offenders deal with “critical rethinking” on their crimes. According to art. 27 d.P.R. 30 June 2000, n. 230, it consists in a dialogical reflection on the wrongdoings they committed, their motivations, the consequences that follow on for the offenders themselves, and the possible reparations during the post-sentencing phase. The study is divided into five chapters. The first chapter focuses on the research for a constitutional basis of the “critical rethinking” and for a renewed understanding of the “finalismo rieducativo” (equivalent to the rehabilitative goal). The second chapter highlights the points of intersection between the “critical rethinking” and the “general theory of crime”. The third chapter summarizes the obstacles and the operative problems that hamper the implementation of this dialogical reflection and describes hints for a possible reform of the criminal justice system, particularly with regard to the post-sentencing phase. The fourth chapter proposes an in-depth analysis of some of the basic key-concepts for the introduction of a dialogical-restorative model of justice. Finally, the fifth chapter investigates the relationship between “rehabilitation” and “restorative justice” and takes into consideration a justice model that is inspired by “responsivity” [John Braithwaite] and “restorative justice dialogue” [Mark S. Umbreit]. By means of that, the study aims at providing a framework for an active assumption of responsibility in a more dialogical and inclusive culture.

The quest for the historical Jesus can be advanced by a consideration of disagreement scenarios recorded in the gospels. Such “conflicts” afford the opportunity not only to analyse the positions of the protagonists, but by comparing them, to better appreciate their relative stances. One area of disagreement that has remained largely unexplored is that between Jesus and the Pharisees over the “kingdom of God”. Indeed, “kingdom of God” formed the very foundation of Jesus’ preaching and thus ought to be the place where fundamental disagreements are to be found. As Luke 17:20-21 represents the only passage in the Gospels where the Pharisees show any interest in the kingdom of God, it forms the central hub of the thesis around which an account of the disparate beliefs of Jesus and the Pharisees on the kingdom of God is constructed. The main thesis is this. Luke 17:20-21 can best be explained, at the level of the Pharisees and Jesus, as betraying a fundamental disagreement, not in the identity of the kingdom of God, which they both regarded as primarily the Divine Royal Presence, i.e. God himself as king, but in the location of that kingdom. The Pharisees located the kingdom in the here-and-now, Jesus located it in heaven. Conversely, at later stages in the formation of the pericope, the pre-Lukan community identified the kingdom as the Holy Spirit located in individuals with faith in Jesus and the redactor identified the kingdom as Jesus, located both in the Historical Jesus and the Jesus now in heaven. Chapter 1, after the usual preliminary remarks, presents an analysis of Luke 17:20-21 as a chreia, a literary form ideally suited as the basis on which to compare the beliefs of the Pharisees and Jesus. The work of three scholars vital to the development of the main thesis is then reviewed and evaluated. By way of background, a portrait of the Pharisees is then presented, highlighting in particular, issues that will be of importance in later chapters. Finally, a section on the Aramaic Targums suggests that some targum traditions may be traced back prior to AD 70 and that these reflect the influence and beliefs of first century Palestinian Pharisees. Chapters 2 and 3 are a consideration of every instance of the explicit mention of God as king (or his kingship) and the Divine Kingdom respectively, in contemporary and earlier Jewish Palestinian literature and in Luke-Acts. A model of the kingdom of God is developed in these chapters that will be applied to Luke 17:20-21 in the next chapter. Chapter 4 presents a detailed exegesis of Luke 17:20-21, taking into account scholarship on the pericope since the last monograph (an unpublished dissertation of 1962) on the chreia. It offers a composition history of the pericope and measures previous exegesis against the view of the kingdom of God as developed in chapters 2 and 3. Chapter 5 presents a summary of the work that relates directly to Luke 17:20-21, some implications arising from the findings and, several possible avenues for future research.

This study is a contextual exegetical encounter with the text of the Sermon on the Plain in Luke 6:12-7:17 which is an ethical discourse embedded in the Jesus tradition where Jesus speaks and acts in solidarity with the poor and the marginalized. The study applies the ethical paradigms of the discourse for socio-economic and political justice to the context of the present Namibian public economic establishment which is unjustly increasing socio-economic disparities in society. The study has therefore adopted Burridge’s (2007) ethical model of an open and inclusive community of Jesus in Luke which Jesus forms and in which he encourages egalitarian socio-economic praxis. Burridge finds this model -the “all-embracing portrait of Jesus” - in Luke’s community. It opens up to all as “it seeks to imitate Jesus”. The Sermon on the Plain is in the current study seen as the epicenter of Luke’s presentations of Jesus’ socio-economic and political ethical teaching and praxis for an egalitarian community, the ethical model which Luke expands throughout his narrative account of the gospel. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in Namibia (ELCIN), the particular contextual focus of this study, is taken as an open and transformative community of Bible readers where this ethical model could be embraced and effect some changes in human behavior that may lead to a more fair, inclusive and equitable socio-economic community, both within the Church and in the predominantly Christian Namibian society. For necessary methodological and hermeneutical approaches to ways in which the New Testament ethics of Jesus - which are the ethical paradigms of ancient communities - can be relevant and applicable to our present day contexts, this study has made use of Burridge’s method that considers New Testament ethics as starting with the historical Jesus. The reconstruction of the historical Jesus and our access to the ethics of Jesus are, according to Burridge, possible through our reading of biblical texts and gospels which are like stained glass so that our picture of what lies behind the text is not unimpeded. This model has been employed by the current study to see beyond Luke’s text the historical Jesus who is part of the peripheral peasant communities. In his context, he encourages the families and villages to sustain their limited socio-economic power through sharing, a form of resistance that Moxnes (1988) terms the “moral economy of the limited good” within the exploitative ruling system. The study identifies the ancient levels of the early Jesus tradition through which the socio-economic and political ethics of Jesus underwent adaptations and continuation. Burridge’s method of the imitation of Jesus and its hermeneutic approach of the gospels as stained glass are in this study applied in Draper’s (1991) African contextual exegetical tripolar framework for our present appropriation. Burridge reads the gospels as narrative biographies of Jesus, presenting Jesus’ words and activities, the umbrella narrative genre in which the ethics of Jesus are not considered as isolated rules or moral prescription. Rather they are rather part of the whole life story of Jesus in which both his rigorous and unconditional acceptance ethics are checked against each other. This approach has led the present researcher to see the community of the followers of Jesus as the place where our ethics of love, mercy, and grace are lived out in tension with the justice of God, which is also at the centre of Jesus’ proclamation of the reign of God as the alternative to socio-economic and political exploitation. This study has therefore argued for the love of Jesus for the marginalized, a love which pushed Jesus to the margins, risking even his life for the sake of justice. ELCIN has been implicated by the dense empirical data of this study. Both the interviews and sermons collected in its Eastern Diocese substantially confirm ELCIN”s timidity, even silence, when it comes to addressing socio-economic and political injustice in Namibia. The study’s findings constitute a qualitative pattern that is transferable to the whole of ELCIN. Therefore the study concludes that ELCIN is collaborating with the proponents in our present government of an unjust system. The data indicates that this situation is accountable for socio-economic and political polarization. The study conscientizes ELCIN, in its prophetic task, to speak from the perspective of the poor and the marginalized, among whom the Church’s “social location” is situated as it continues “seeking to imitate Jesus”. The study suggests that the Church should shift from the traditional spiritualizing of human daily life experiences to critical contextual biblical hermeneutics and appropriation which motivates self-theologizing and local debates. It crucially suggests that ELCIN distances itself from the euphoric excitement of political independence to choose a position of critical solidarity with the state and to operate without its voice being marred by ambivalence. Transformative and liberating formal and informal education is suggested as essential for empowering the marginalized, whereby ELCIN can play a vital role. Reading the Bible together as an open community of the followers of Jesus is suggested so that ELCIN will become an interpretive community that dialogues and openly debates socio-economic and political issues in the light of its unbiased appropriation of the biblical message.
Thesis (Ph.D.)-Unviversity of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2013.

碩士
台灣神學研究學院
神學碩士班
107
The motivation of this paper is to respond to the questioning of the traditional interpretation in the parable of “Barren Fig Tree” (Luke 13:6-9). The researcher believes that, the gardener should not be seen as Jesus, and the main purpose of the parable is not only to appeal to the fig tree, a symbolic meaning of Israelites unwillingness to repent, but to point out the gardeners who have not done their duty to take care of the fruit trees is the main object of repentance. The researcher would like to expand the text, Luke 11:37-13:17 by locating in the literary context of the parable, and apply “Rhetorical criticism” as research method in study the text. Consequently, the “Thesis” of the main rhetorical writing structure of author Luke, intended to argue: do religious leaders need repentance? The answer is affirmative: they needed repentance and the rhetorical proposition is: alms (Luke 11:39-41) served as a way for religious leaders for repentance. When Luke edited the parable of “Barren fig tree”, he intentionally used the rhetoric of "prosopopoeia" taught by Aelius Theon in the first century rhetoric progymnasmata; to “play” the religious leader as metaphorical gardener's role, who pleaded to the owner for another chance to fulfilled his duty. Luke intended to place in a context of calling on religious leaders to repent, and thus, the unending parable also called for listeners to repent. The religious leaders depicted by Luke were still reluctant to repent in the conclusion of argument.

O episódio da ressurreição do filho da viúva de Naim (cf. Lc 7,11-17), do qual procurámos uma melhor compreensão ao longo da nossa pesquisa, torna claro que a misericórdia, que coincide com o agir de Jesus, restitui vida aos mortos. Ao entregar à mãe, vivo, o filho que estava morto, Jesus revela ser o Senhor da vida e da morte. Ele é o novo Elias esperado por Israel, é Deus que vem visitar o seu povo, e, sendo Deus, enfrenta a morte e a vence para sempre. N’Ele se revela a misericórdia, como principal atributo divino, que restitui o homem à sua dignidade mais genuína e constitui o núcleo central da mensagem evangélica. O milagre de Naim constitui um sinal de esperança para todos aqueles que, tal como o filho da viúva de Naim, experimentando a morte, esperam, da misericórdia do Senhor, escutar aquela palavra anastática: Levanta-te! Uma ordem dada num tom imperativo que recria o homem, ferido mortalmente, nas dimensões mais recônditas do seu ser, o restabelece na sua capacidade de se relacionar e o abre para a vida. A misericórdia, própria do ser e do agir de Deus, deve ser replicada no jeito de estar e de agir do discípulo, em cumprimento do mandato de Jesus: “Sede misericordiosos como o vosso Pai é misericordioso” (Lc 6,36). Ela deve ser a expressão da nossa koinônia fraterna e a manifestação evangélica da nossa adesão ao “mandamento novo”. Ainda recentemente, o Papa Francisco convocou toda a Igreja para o Jubileu Extraordinário da Misericórdia com o objetivo de nos recolocar no seguimento de Cristo, o “Rosto da Misericórdia”.
The episode of the resurrection of the son of the widow of Naim (cf. Lk 7: 11-17), from which we have sought a better understanding throughout our research, makes it clear that mercy, which coincides with the action of Jesus, dead. By giving the living child to the mother who was dead, Jesus reveals to be the Lord of life and death. He is the new Elijah awaited by Israel, it is God who comes to visit his people, and, being God, faces death and conquers forever. In him mercy is revealed, as the principal divine attribute, which restores man to his most genuine dignity and constitutes the central nucleus of the Gospel message. The miracle of Naim is a sign of hope for all those who, like the son of the widow of Naim, who experience death, expect from the mercy of the Lord to hear that anastatic word: Arise! An order given in an imperative tone that recreates man, mortally wounded, in the most recondite dimensions of his being, reestablishes him in his capacity to relate and opens him to life. Mercy, proper to God's being and action, must be replicated in the disciple's way of being and acting, in fulfillment of Jesus' command: "Be merciful, as your Father is merciful" (Luke 6:36). It should be the expression of our fraternal koinônia and the evangelical manifestation of our adherence to the "new commandment". Recently, Pope Francis summoned the whole Church to the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy to bring us back to Christ, the "Face of Mercy".

Cette présente recherche vise à défendre le point de vue selon lequel le don de l’Esprit dans le récit de la Pentecôte (Ac 2, 1-13) s’interprète principalement comme l’investissement d’une puissance habilitant au témoignage. À cette fin, nous posons l’hypothèse que le contenu d’Ac 2, 17-21 est un axe fondamental de la théologie pneumatique de l’œuvre lucanienne, lequel interprète la manifestation pentecostale dans une perspective prophétique. La démonstration se fait par le biais d’une analyse rédactionnelle d’Ac 2, 17-21, une citation de Jl 3,1-5 insérée dans un discours explicatif de Pierre du phénomène pentecostal. Nous examinons d’abord le lieu d’inscription de ce passage dans l’œuvre lucanienne afin d’évaluer la valeur stratégique de son emplacement (chapitre 1). Nous étudions ensuite l’interprétation que fait Luc de cette prophétie pour en venir à la conclusion qu’il envisage l’intervention de l’Esprit essentiellement dans une perspective d’habilitation à la prophétie (chapitre 2). Nous vérifions cette première conclusion dans l’Évangile de Luc (chapitre 3); puis ensuite dans les Actes des Apôtres (chapitre 4). Nous en arrivons ainsi à établir un parallélisme entre les étapes initiatiques du ministère de Jésus dans le troisième évangile et celui des disciples dans les Actes, pour y découvrir que, dans les deux cas, l’effusion de l’Esprit habilite à l’activité prophétique. Le ministère des disciples s’inscrit de la sorte dans le prolongement de celui du Maître. Nous soutenons, en fait, que tout le discours pneumatique de l’Évangile de Luc converge vers l’effusion initiale de l’Esprit sur les disciples dans le récit pentecostal, d’une part, et que cette effusion jette un éclairage sur l’ensemble de l’œuvre missionnaire des Actes, d’autre part. Bref, le passage explicatif du phénomène pentecostal, en l’occurrence Ac 2, 17-21, met en lumière un axe central des perspectives de Luc sur l’Esprit : Il s’agit de l’Esprit de prophétie. Dans cette optique, l’effusion de l’Esprit à la Pentecôte s’interpréterait essentiellement comme l’investissement du croyant d’une puissance en vue du témoignage.
This present research argues that the gift of the Spirit in the Pentecost account (Ac 2.1-13) is to be understood as a source of empowerment for the task of witnessing. The thesis that I defend is that the passage of Ac 2.17-21 is in fact a fundamental axis of the pneumatic theology of Luke’s work, which in turn interprets the pentecostal gift as a prophetic endowment. I will demonstrate this affirmation by performing a redactional analysis of Ac 2.17-21, which is, in fact, a citation from Jl 3.1-5 quoted in Peter’s pentecostal speech whose purpose is to interpret the pneumatic phenomenon of Ac 2.1-13. I start by examining the specific position of Ac 2.17-21 in order to assess the strategic value of its location (chapter 1). I will then carefully look at how Luke interprets this prophecy, only to conclude that he understands the work of the Spirit mainly as a source of empowerment for a prophetic task (chapter 2). I will verify this conclusion throughout the Gospel of Luke (chapter 3), and then in the Acts of the Apostles (chapter 4). This exercise will bring to light an important parallel between the circumstances surrounding the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry in the Gospel of Luke and that of the disciples in Acts, which shows that, in both cases, the Spirit is given as a source of power for a prophetic ministry. The disciples’ ministry is therefore to be understood to lie in the continuity of the one of the Master. Consequently, we will see that all of the pneumatic discourse of Luke’s Gospel converges towards the initial outpouring of the Spirit on the disciples in the Pentecost account, and that this same passage subsequently sheds light on the missionary work in Acts. In short, the interpretative passage of the pentecostal phenomenon, Ac 2.17-21, brings to light a fundamental axis of Luke’s perspectives on the Sprit; It is the prophetic Spirit. The gift of Spirit at Pentecost is then in turn to be understood primarily as a prophetic endowment enabling the disciples to witness.