| | | Document Type | : | Latin Dissertation | | Language of Document | : | English | | Record Number | : | 52680 | | Doc. No | : | TL22634 | | Call number | : | 3308212 | | Main Entry | : | Jonathan S. Marshall | | Title & Author | : | Jesus, patrons, and benefactors in Roman Palestine and the Gospel of LukeJonathan S. Marshall | | College | : | Trinity International University | | Date | : | 2008 | | Degree | : | Ph.D. | | student score | : | 2008 | | Page No | : | 597 | | Abstract | : | Scholars interpret Luke-Acts in terms of patrons-clients and benefactors. Three scholars in particular emphasize these relationships (H. Moxnes, F. W. Danker, J. B. Green). After describing patron-client relationships and discipleship, Moxnes calls for an extended, exegetical treatment of the subject. This dissertation answers his call. Socio-historians use the category "patron-client" to describe asymmetrical, long-term, and reciprocal relationships in many societies including first-century Palestine. Exegetes also use the category "benefactor" to describe the generous elite. Because benefactor-beneficiary relationships were asymmetrical, long-term, and reciprocal they are thought to be an expression of (socio-historical) "patron-client" relationships. Socio-historical "patronage" was developed from the Roman practice of patrocinium (R. P. Sailer, S. N. Eisenstadt and L. Roniger, A. Wallace-Hadrill). Exegetes often fail to differentiate the socio-historical ("patron-client") from the Roman ( patrocinium) categories. This failure results in accusations against Luke for errantly imposing his (Roman) culture upon Palestine. By clarifying the differences between patrocinium and socio-historical patronage (C. Eilers, J. Nicols) accusations against Luke are challenged. First-century Palestine and its rulers are investigated in search of patrocinium and benefaction. Although the primary places of Jesus' ministry (Galilee, Jerusalem) were dominated by Jewish customs, there was some expression of benefaction in certain areas (Tiberias, Jerusalem, Caesarea, Philip's tetrarchy) and one explicit expression of patrocinium (Tyre). Of the four Herodian rulers investigated all were benefactors, but Agrippa I is explicitly mentioned as a patronus. Three passages from Luke (6:17-38; 14:1-24; 22:14-34) are examined. No reason exists for interpreting any of the passages primarily in terms of patrocinium, and only in 6:17-38 is there an explicit audience (Tyrians) who would have had patrocinium as an interpretive grid. Verbal and contextual clues suggest that Jesus may have taught in terms of benefaction, especially at the Last Supper. But these Greco-Roman categories were overshadowed by Hellenistic Jewish cultural matters. Jesus challenges the reciprocity-ethic, calling his disciples to deny generosity in expectation of human reciprocation. Instead they ought to target those who cannot reciprocate so that God will reciprocate. He also advances a service oriented benefaction and new hierarchy with God and himself atop as benefactors who distribute kingdoms to loyal followers. | | Subject | : | Philosophy, religion and theology; Benefactor; Gospel of Luke; Historical Jesus; Jesus Christ; Palestine; Patron patronage; Patrons; Reciprocity; Roman Empire; Bible; Theology; 0321:Bible; 0469:Theology | | Added Entry | : | E. J. Schnabel | | Added Entry | : | Trinity International University |
| | | | | |
| | |  |
http://lib.clisel.com/site/catalogue/52680
| | | |
| | | |
|