Nijay K. Gupta
Autore di Tell Her Story: How Women Led, Taught, and Ministered in the Early Church
Sull'Autore
Nijay K. Gupta is Associate Professor of New Testament at Portland Seminary at George Fox University. He has written 1 and 2 Thessalonians in the Zondervan Critical Introductions to the New Testament Series and is coeditor of The State of New Testament Studies with Scot McKnight. Gupta lives in mostra altro Portland, Oregon. mostra meno
Opere di Nijay K. Gupta
1 and 2 Thessalonians (Zondervan Critical Introductions to the New Testament Series) (2019) 42 copie
Prepare, Succeed, Advance: A Guidebook for Getting a PhD in Biblical Studies and Beyond (2011) 25 copie
Prepare, Succeed, Advance, Second Edition: A Guidebook for Getting a PhD in Biblical Studies and Beyond (2019) 11 copie
Worship that Makes Sense to Paul: A New Approach to the Theology and Ethics of Paul's Cultic Metaphors (Beihefte… (2010) 9 copie
Living the King Jesus Gospel: Discipleship and Ministry Then and Now (A Tribute to Scot McKnight) (2021) 6 copie
The Beginning of Paul's Gospel: Theological Explorations in Romans 1-4 (Contours of Pauline Theology) (2023) 3 copie
Paul & the Language of Faith 1 copia
A Fruitful Partnership 1 copia
Opere correlate
Etichette
Informazioni generali
- Nome legale
- Gupta, Nijay Kumar
- Sesso
- male
- Luogo di residenza
- Portland, Oregon, USA
- Istruzione
- University of Durham (PhD|New Testament)
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (MDiv)
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (ThM)
Utenti
Recensioni
Potrebbero anche piacerti
Autori correlati
Statistiche
- Opere
- 23
- Opere correlate
- 4
- Utenti
- 486
- Popolarità
- #50,828
- Voto
- 4.2
- Recensioni
- 26
- ISBN
- 49
- Lingue
- 1
The early Christians in Roman society were weird. Strange. They weren’t trying to be. But their faith resulted in them standing apart from others in Roman society. Their beliefs and practices broke with religious conventions. Yet some found them strangely compelling and their movement kept growing. nijay K. Gupta transports us back to first and second century Roman culture to help us see why they were thought so strange.
He breaks his study into four parts. The first shows how strange becoming Christian was. In Roman society, the gods just were, and there were lots of them. One didn’t choose to believe in a god so much as did the things to stay on good terms with the gods, pax deorum, or “peace with the gods.” There were regular practices to appease the gods. No one thought about friendship with the gods, just staying on their good side. Then Christians came along talking about believing–that there was one God, that Jesus came as the image of God in human flesh, and thus they made no images. Faith had both content and was personal–people trusted in God because of Jesus, saw them in a covenant friendship with God. What’s more, this Jesus who they worshipped as the image of God died a despised death on a Roman cross and his followers claimed that he physically rose and, because of this, they believed they would one day bodily be resurrected. Strange, huh? They also thought it was dangerous, not a religion but a superstition that could endanger the social order. It was innovative rather than ancient, ecstatic rather than ritualized, individual rather than corporate, and desperate, as in intense in devotion, rather than ritually effective.
Then there was the matter of what they believed–unbelievable things! They believed in the supremacy of Jesus as Lord over all, not one of a company of gods. There was no smoke and blood of sacrifices but simply worship. Rather than believing in shrines and temples as “spiritual hot spots” to connect with the God, they believed themselves indwelt with God through the Holy Spirit, enabling them to worship and connect with God anywhere. Finally, they thought differently about time, not as an annual calendar of festivals to the gods, but in terms of what has been fulfilled in time and what is yet to be fulfilled–is it time yet?
They were strange in how they gathered to worship–privately in houses rather than at appointed times in public at temples. It led to a lot of rumors. There was the language of family–brother and sister. Instead of priest, the were led by the head of the household, who presumably managed his own household well. And these gatherings broke social conventions with rich and poor, slave and free, men and women at table together. It was also a priestless gathering, with Christ their priest, whose sacrifice for them was remembered in the bread and cup of shared meals. They responded to him in offered lives, songs of praise, and prayers as he had taught them. All in these private household gatherings.
Apart from the mystery cults, Romans didn’t want to get too close to their gods. By contrast, Christians sought to become like Christ, to imitate Christ. And what they imitated stood out. They sought to follow Christ in his humility, his love, righteousness, and purity–not qualities sought after by the Romans. The status-toppling life of Jesus from Son to despised servant who died upturned all social hierarchies, leading to a radical equality, as already noted. But Gupta pauses at this point to observe their imperfections. They fought and split. They did not protest the institution of slavery. and they slandered each other and spoke judgmentally, making statements that would later be used to justify anti-Semitism.
So what made these strange people so compelling? Gupta speculates:
“Some say it was the promise of immortality. Some say it was the networking savvy of spreading the religion in an organized across the whole empire. Some say it was the attraction of monotheism. Some say it was the teaching on morality. I am sure all of these are factors. But I can’t help but believe it was the people, the Christians themselves. In the first century a Roman encounter with Jesus was probably going to happen through a small community of Christians. This community had to be compelling.”
One can’t help but reflect on the parallels and differences in our own social setting. It makes me wonder if we are thought strange and weird and dangerous and compelling in ways that reflect the gospel of the kingdom of Jesus. Are we thought strange because we impoverish ourselves to help those with even greater needs in our midst? Are we thought weird because renounce consumerism and unsustainable living on our planet as well as self-promotion for ways of hidden service? Are we thought dangerous because we challenge national pretensions to imperial greatness for the sake of the advance of God’s transnational kingdom, and because we welcome the “others” that our politicians consider dangerous? Are we thought compelling in a society of epic loneliness because we really function as family, especially for those who have none? What troubles me as I write this is that by and large, I don’t think these are the ways we are found to be strange, weird, and dangerous. And I wonder if we are found compelling in consequence?
What strikes me in Gupta’s account is that the early believers weren’t trying to be strange, weird, dangerous, or compelling. They were struggling, imperfectly to be sure, to follow Jesus, to become like him. Their lives, their practices, including their transformed social relationships, were shaped by what they believed, by who they believed. And this makes me ask, quite simply, are we?
____________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.… (altro)