‘Christians and Missionaries in India: Cross-Cultural Communication Since 1500’ [Book Review], Journal of Ecclesiastical History (Cambridge, 2004) (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Christology of Early Christian Practice
Journal of Biblical Literature, 2008
1 To avoid obvious anachronisms in referring to early conceptions of Jesus, I use "prophet typology" rather than "prophet christology. " There are nevertheless trajectories from early conceptions to later confessions, and I do not want to convey the idea of early conceptions as "protochristologies" in the sense of being somehow insufficient or by necessity temporary in comparison with later developments.
Jesus and Early Christian Identity Formation
Connecting Gospels, 2018
The article analyses various early gospels, canonical and noncanonical, with regard to their contribution to the development of the early Jesus tradition. It argues that the separation between “canonical” and “noncanonical” gospels cannot be equated with the distinction of “orthodox” and “heretical” groups in Early Christianity. Instead, also noncanonical gospels have contributed to the formation of the early Jesus tradition in a considerable way.
Prof. Larry Hurtado’s three-volume work on christological origins has advanced understanding in several key respects and his account is simpler than that of his predecessors. However, it remains an evolutionary, multi-stage model and it is historically problematic. He overstates the case for Jewish opposition to Christ-devotion, minimises the ethical particularity of earliest Christianity and the model suffers some serious internal tensions. His claim that religious experiences gave the decisive impetus to Christ-devotion does not reckon adequately with the implications of social-science study, is not supported by the primary texts and conflicts with the important evidence that visionary and mystical practices were frowned upon in some early Christian quarters. Hurtado presents his work as theologically disinterested. However, he endorses Lessing’s radical separation of theology and history and this theologically loaded judgement seems to be reflected in the non-incarnational character of the Christology Hurtado describes.
Review of “Jesus and Early Christianity in the Gospels: A New Dialogue” (2002)
Baha’i Studies Review, 2003
Christopher Buck, Review of Daniel Grolin, Jesus and Early Christianity in the Gospels: A New Dialogue. Baha’i Studies Review 11 (2003): 108–112. Jesus and Early Christianity in the Gospels: A New Dialogue. By Daniel J. Grolin. Oxford: George Ronald, 2002. 522 pp. + 2 indexes (21 pp.) ISBN 0-85398-462-X. Price: £19.95, $38.95 What is the value of scholarship for interfaith dialogue? Ideally, scholarship can provide a common ground of expertise from which dialogue might proceed. Scholars may be regarded as arbiters (but not the sole judges) of textual authenticity and of the contemporary–historical interpretation of sacred text. These experts themselves are in dialogue. Their investigations, which are methodologically self- conscious, virtual discussions, constitute a ‘community of discourse’ within a given ‘research tradition’. While their personal beliefs are supposed to be ‘bracketed’ in favour of achieving a ‘critical empathy’ for the religious traditions they study, biases may be disguised and insinuated into research results. Still, one could hardly ask for a more dispassionate inquiry into matters of sacred text. In Baha’i parlance, one might say that academic scholarship is a corporate form of the ‘independent investigation of truth’. And it is into this world of scholarship that author Daniel Grolin invites us to participate as active spectators – in preparation for both a search after truth and a Baha’i–Christian dialogue. Jesus and Early Christianity in the Gospels is an introduction to the gospel narratives (both canonical and apocryphal), with an overarching interest in interfaith dialogue, as indicated by the subtitle, A New Dialogue. One may even speak of a certain ‘globalization’ of the figure of Jesus, as theologians in nearly every major world religion have reflected on the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus has become universalized in ways quite unanticipated by the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – and Thomas. Any interfaith dialogue in which Jesus is at the heart of the matter necessarily involves Christians as a party to the discussion. For the dialogue to be meaningful, each party must ‘witness’ to his or her own understanding of the salvific and vivifying role of Jesus Christ. For interfaith dialogue to be constructive and productive, it must agree to rules – ideally, to a certain procedure for reaching common ground.