Skip to main content

Saturday Morning Thesis brain Storm

My thesis is coming along slowly but I have begun to realise that my current question is more like a PhD than a Masters, and I dont have the time or money to be considering one of those at the moment! So I am unforunately looking at narrowing the question. The problem with this is that much of my thesis was going to be looking at the development of the metaphor across the corpus (collection of Paul's letters) and if I only do one book tings would have to change. So this morning I have had a brain storm to see if I did just do 1 Corinthians if I would have enough to talk about...

"Christ's body and its parts: An Ecclesiological Metaphor in 1 Corinthians"

Metaphor theses and questions
  • That the use of mele (member) must be taken account of as well as soma (body) in appreciating this metpahor (contra Yorke)
  • That how the metaphor is used in varied locations and constructions in 1 Corinthians has ramifications for discussions of development across the corpus
  • That the Metaphor is used and presented in such a way as to suggest the concept is already extant among Corinthian church - possibly through Paul's earlier letter or ministry. (this is necessary for those who wish to interpret 11:29 as being ecclesiological, although even with this it remains a moot point)
  • How does this metaphor interact with other metaphors in 1 Cor?
  • That the source question is both an old-chesnut and a dead-horse.

Interpretational/Theological theses and questions
  • That the Christological character of the body cannot be reduced to possesion (contra Yorke) but neither can it be identified wholesale with Christ's resurected human body (contra JAT Robinson) and so some theological middle ground must be exegetically uncovered. (3:23 could be important in this)
  • Should the metaphor be understood primarily as theological (Jewett) or idealogical (Martin) engagement?
  • What place does the metaphor have in the overall ecclesiology of 1 Cor?
  • How does the metaphor relate to themes of resurrection and eucharist and Spirit? (i.e. is it purely rhetorical in function or does it contribute in other ways?)
Aplicational/Missional possiblities

  • To explore the potential of this metaphor (once correctly exegetically comprehended) in contempory (multicultural) Urban church settings
  • To explore and critique contemporary concepts and practices of church membership in light of the metaphor
  • To work towards a 'higher' evangelical ecclesiology

So...

That should be enough to keep me busy don't you think?

Would of course value any other ideas, suggestions, questions that spring to mind :-)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Dr Charles Stanley is not a biblical preacher

Unusually for me I was watching the tele early on Sunday morning and I caught an episode of Dr Charles Stanley preaching on his television program. Now I know this guy has come under some criticism for his personal life, and that is not unimportant, but it is also not something i can comment on, not knowing the facts. His preaching is however something I can comment on, at least the one sermon I did watch.

He started off by reading 2 Timothy 1:3-7. Which is a passage from the Bible, so far so good. He then spent the next 30 minutes or so talking about his mum and what a great example of a Christian mother she was. Now nothing he said or suggested was wrong, but none of it actually came from scripture, least of all the scripture he read from at the beginning. It was a lovely talk on how Stanley's mother raised him as a Christian despite considerable difficulties and it contained many useful nuggets of advice on raising Christian kids. All very nice, it might have made a nice…

That one time Jesus got the Bible wrong

It's so typical isn't it? You are preaching all day long, training your disciples, sparring with the Pharisees, encouraging the poor and down trodden, healing the sick and casting out demons, all day, day after day, and even when you go up a mountain to get a rest the crowds hunt you down and follow you up, and then the one time you get a bit muddled up with some of the details of a biblical text . . . that is the one they write down in the first gospel - verbatim. At least Matthew and Luke had the good sense to do some editing. But Mark, he always had his eye on giving the public the "historical Jesus" whoever that is supposed to be . . . warts and all. Thanks a lot Mark!

Some think I made the mistake on purpose, just to show the Pharisees up.

For some there is no mistake worth mentioning, only a slightly ambiguous turn of phrase.

Others think I am doing something tricky with Abiathar's name, getting him to figuratively stand in for the priesthood.

It really has…

The Addictive Power of End Times Speculation

The mighty Rhett Snell has picked up his blog again (I wonder how long he'll last this time), check out his theory on why people get so into annoyingly unbiblical end times nonsense.

I think that where codes-and-calendars end times theology is dangerous, is that it can give a sense of false growth. We read a theory online, or hear it from some bible teacher, and we come to think that we have mastered an area of our faith. A bit like levelling up in a computer game, or Popeye after he’s eaten some spinach. At worst, we begin to believe that we’ve taken a step that other Christians have not; that we’ve entered an elite class of Christianity.