Jesus condemns the scribes and Pharisees for building memorials for prophets and adorning the tombs of the righteous (Matthew 23:29). This is mere external honor, since they don’t actually follow the teachings of the prophets. It’s as insufficient as cleansing the outside of the cup. . . . . Continue Reading »
Matthew 23:29-36 works out as a fairly neat chiasm: A. Woe to scribes, build tombs of prophets and adorn monuments of righteous, v 29 B. Blood of the prophets, v. 30 C. You are sons of murderous fathers; fill their guilt, vv 31-32 D. Serpents, brood of vipers, v 33 C’. They will treat . . . . Continue Reading »
Craig Carter, one of the leading interpreters of Yoder’s work, says I got Yoder wrong in my post yesterday. He writes on his blog. He says that I “don’t understand what Yoder meant by the Constantinian Shift. Your mistake is actually a common one. This is not for Yoder an . . . . Continue Reading »
My forthcoming book on hermeneutics is available for pre-order at Amazon, Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture . . . . . Continue Reading »
Vinoth Ramachandra ( Subverting Global Myths: Theology and the Public Issues Shaping Our World ) acknowledges that there are “many shameful stories to be told of Western missionary complicity in colonial practices of domination,” but adds that “the more typical stories of . . . . Continue Reading »
If, as Yoder claims, the “Constantinian” compromise of the church with the world begins in the second and third centuries; if it begins when Christianity is still an illicit religion, persecuted periodically but savagely; if it begins when the church is still populated by martyrs - is . . . . Continue Reading »
Yoder is a sometimes bizarre combination of profound insight and infuriating oversimplification verging on ignorance. He claims, for instance, that Augustine offers “a consensus kind of moral thought,” a moral thought based on “what everybody thinks.” He goes on: Augustine . . . . Continue Reading »
Yoder again: “What we are now doing is what leads to where we are going. Since the ‘this-worldly’ and the ‘otherworldly’ [are] not perceived in radical dichotomy, to be ‘marching through Emmanuel’s ground’ today is to be on the way to Zion. Terms like . . . . Continue Reading »
Yoder writes of the difference between theories of emanation and John’s Christology: “instead of tailoring Jesus to fit the slots prepared for him, John breaks the cosmology’s rules. At the bottom of the ladder, the Logos is said to have become flesh, to have lived among us as in . . . . Continue Reading »
Daniel Barber ( Modern Theology ) notes that “particularity cannot be reduced to universality. Therefore we have a philosophical reason for approaching Jesus through particularity: sufficient reason, when conceived as universality, is insufficient; causal frameworks cannot negotiate . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
