Preface

Byers, Andrew

doi:10.1017/9781316823750.001

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the relationship between Pauline deification and Christological, pneumatological, protological, and eschatological issues requiring further clarification as well. Lastly, a small number of inquiries within the modern guild of biblical studies examining deification have analyzed non-Pauline texts (Gifford 2011; Byers 2017; Gorman 2018). Hence, there is ample room for projects that place deiform readings of the Pauline corpus in dialogue with Johannine (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Becoming god: Interpreting Pauline soteriology as deification

Reardon

2023

Currents in Biblical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past five decades, the doctrine of deification has experienced a renaissance within the Protestant West. While biblical scholars have exhibited greater reticence to ascribe explicitly deiform intentions to Scripture than their theologian counterparts, this article traces the recent emergence of interest in interpreting Pauline soteriology as deification. Intriguingly, scholars within this burgeoning line of inquiry of scholarship represent a host of interpretative schools (e.g. apocalyptic, new perspective on Paul) and methodological approaches (exegetical, history-of-religion, reception history, theological interpretation), yet nevertheless affirm broadly similar portrayals of the deiform contours and content of Paul’s doctrine of salvation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Becoming god: Interpreting Pauline soteriology as deification

Reardon

2023

Currents in Biblical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, it is a work of ecclesiology, not in that it seeks to address particulars in the so-called Markan community (as in the historical-critical mirror-readings), and neither in that it merely provides in Jesus an example to emulate (as in the proponents of biography). Mark 1.1–3 launches an ‘ecclesial narrative script’ (Byers 2017: 82–102; idem 2021: 70–74) that limns the identity of those rescued and redeemed by God’s cosmic deliverance through Christ. The Isaianic gospel is concerned not only with the deliverer but with the delivered.…”

Section: Conclusion: Reading Mark’s Gospel As (An Innovative Literary...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Genre of Mark’s Gospel Is ‘Gospel’: Reconsidering Literary Innovation in the Markan Incipit

Byers

2023

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classifying Gospels as ancient Graeco-Roman biographies addresses an array of scholarly questions about how these texts relate to their wider literary culture. That classification also requires considerable qualification since Gospels—particularly the Gospel of Mark—at times diverge from certain generic conventions. This study rearticulates the out-of-fashion claim that ‘Mark’ created a new literary genre, even if penned in a biographical structure. When this pioneer evangelist breaks the compositional silence, he reveals immediately that he is writing ‘gospel’. As a recognizable communication type, ‘gospel’ was an oral proclamation of deliverance and rescue that this writer innovatively narrativizes and textualizes. If this work is a biography, it is so only secondarily, because primarily, Mark is a ‘gospel’ announcing an interruptive divine deliverance that is narratable and so scripturally evocative that it is worthy of textual rendering. In opening the scroll to Mark, εὐθύς there is εὐαγγέλιον (immediately, there is gospel), a designation beckoning the audience to receive what follows as if the skies have been split open and the soundscape burst apart with a new story-shaped word that disrupts reality as well as literary conventions. What is the genre of this early Christian text? It is just what Mark tells us: ‘gospel’.

show abstract

“…While this so-called ‘clumsy’ (Barrett 1978: 387) or ‘awkward and ill-formulated’ (Hoskyns 1940: 399) opening statement was once almost ubiquitously deemed an inept later gloss, 14 given more recent emphasis on the importance of re-readings in grasping the author’s literary intent (cf. Culpepper 1983: 200; Byers 2017: 21 n. 79), such an obvious gap screams rather of a conscious literary technique (cf. Moloney 2003: 510).…”

Section: Initial Observations: Jesus’s Death and Resurrection In Jn 1...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In his work on narrative ecclesiology in John, Andrew Byers (2017: 20) noted how both ‘the use of the first person plural in [the author’s] narration and his occasional direct addresses to the audience indicate an acute consciousness of a communal reality . .…”

Section: Ecclesiology In Jn 111–1211: Dying With Jesus As a Mark Of D...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is somewhat surprising, as the past few decades of Johannine scholarship have witnessed a significant shift away from the largely anti-ecclesiological readings of the twentieth century to a recognition not only that John seeks to affect a communal reality through his Gospel but that this ecclesiological vision is grounded precisely in the Gospel’s Christology. Thus, studies have unpacked variously how such axioms as Jesus’s status as λόγος (Minear 1982), his incarnation (Schnelle 1991), his being sent (Ferreira 1998; Kysar 2001), his constituting the new temple (Coloe 2001; 2007; Schneiders 2006), even his divine sonship (Akala 2014; Byers 2017) set in John a precedent for the nature of discipleship—situating ‘believers as the continuing incarnation of the Word’ (Kysar 2001: 375), as the ‘ongoing presence and action of Jesus in the world’ (Schneiders 2006: 355), ‘able to continue the mission the Father entrusted to Jesus’ (Coloe 2001: 217; cf. 1.12–14; 15.12; 17.11, 18, 21–23; 20.21).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

That We Might Die with Him: Jesus’s Death and Resurrection as a Paradigm for Discipleship in Jn 11.1–12.11

Hase

2023

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite growing recognition that the Fourth Gospel’s ecclesiological vision is modeled on aspects of the Gospel’s Christology, the possibility that this extends to Jesus’s death and resurrection has received little attention. Offering a close rereading of John’s notoriously enigmatic story of Lazarus, this study seeks to demonstrate that the notion of Jesus’s death and resurrection as a paradigm for discipleship is embedded in, and sheds interpretative light on, the complexities of this lengthy Johannine story. Through a fresh, multidimensional analysis of Jn 11.1–12.11 and other contextual factors, it is concluded that undergirding this narrative is the disciple’s necessary participation in Jesus’s death and resurrection; that the semiotic import of death within this paradigm encompasses affliction; and that this functional dynamic enabled the Johannine community to locate its affliction within a broader, hope-laden, purposive framework.

show abstract

Preface

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Becoming god: Interpreting Pauline soteriology as deification

Becoming god: Interpreting Pauline soteriology as deification

The Genre of Mark’s Gospel Is ‘Gospel’: Reconsidering Literary Innovation in the Markan Incipit

That We Might Die with Him: Jesus’s Death and Resurrection as a Paradigm for Discipleship in Jn 11.1–12.11

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About