dc.contributor.author |
Janse van Rensburg, Hanré
|
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2012-04-20T08:37:13Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2012-04-20T08:37:13Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2011-12 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae, vol 37, Supplement, pp 67-89 |
en |
dc.identifier.issn |
10170499 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10500/5652 |
en |
dc.description |
Peer reviewed. |
en |
dc.description.abstract |
One of the most important and influential New Testament
scholars of our times, John Dominic Crossan, has done extensive
work on the resurrection – not as mere confession, but as a
declaration of autonomy in defiance of the Roman Empire. He
also emphasises the fact that the presence and influence of the
idea of “empire” is not something that was left behind with the
end of the Roman Empire, for in the study of the Historical
Jesus and his significance we also find that we are dealing with
empire. Nowhere has this become more clear in the South
African context than in the debate (battle?) between church and
university. With Crossan as dialogue partner, this article aims
to study the empirical function of claims about the resurrection
within these South African debates and their various claims to
power and influence (context). |
en |
dc.format.extent |
1 online resource (24 pages) |
en |
dc.language.iso |
en |
en |
dc.publisher |
Church History Society of Southern Africa |
en |
dc.subject |
Resurrection |
en |
dc.subject |
New Testament |
en |
dc.subject |
Resistance |
en |
dc.subject |
Dutch Reformed Church |
en |
dc.subject |
Confessional Jesus |
en |
dc.subject.ddc |
236.8 |
|
dc.subject.lcsh |
Resurrection |
en |
dc.subject.lcsh |
Resurrection -- History of doctrines |
en |
dc.subject.lcsh |
Church history |
en |
dc.title |
The resurrection as paradigm for power or for resistance? |
en |
dc.type |
Article |
en |
dc.description.department |
Research Institute for Theology and Religion |
en |