Abstract
Should one take the redemptive spirit within the slavery texts and the women texts beyond certain time-locked components of the NT? Does the redemptive movement, begun in the OT and extended in the NT, need to be extended even further beyond the NT? Or, should we expect the NT to express a totally realized ethic or a completely finalized expression of redemptive-movement meaning in all of its concrete particulars? Thomas R. Schreiner’s critique of the book, Slaves, Women and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis levels a central criticism against a redemptive-movement hermeneutic (RM hermeneutic), namely, that it fails to rightly appreciate the NT as God’s final and definitive revelation. Schreiner’s central criticism expresses his conviction about limiting the Christian use of a RM hermeneutic to the OT only; a RM hermeneutic ought not to be applied to the NT. In reply to Schreiner, this article attempts to correct a fundamental misunderstanding in the debate as well as to argue the alternative thesis that indeed a RM hermeneutic ought to be applied to the NT.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
