Contextual Bible Study

A short meditation on Revelation 2:12-17
Pergamum church was faithful is spite of trials and suffering, and evildoers people. They hold fast the name of Christ and continued to witness but few things they needed to improve. We are good but in some areas the word of telling us to repent from evildoers. Hope you will be bless as you read this short sermon.

Have you ever considered the apparent injustices, inconsistencies, and even contradictions of the doctrine of hell? For starters, do earthly parents love their children more than God? Does God ask you to forgive your enemies when He is not willing to do the same? Is being punished forever for sins committed in a short lifetime really "justice"? Does everybody really get the same fair chance to believe in Jesus before they die? If hell is the worst possible fate of mankind, and if God is truly loving, then…

Why did He fail to mention hell in Genesis as the price for sin?

Why doesn’t the Old Testament ever teach about or even mention hell?

Why doesn't Paul, the apostle to the non-Jewish world, ever once mention hell?

Why has orthodox Judaism (to whom Scriptures were given) never believed in any kind of eternal punishment or hell?

Why was hell not the orthodox position of the early Church for five centuries after Christ?

Why can't theologians agree if we are saved by election or free will?

Dare to question. What have you got to lose? If you’ve ever had doubts or questions about the incompatibility of eternal torment with a merciful God, Raising Hell will open your eyes to a radical view of God’s loving purpose for all humanity and what the “Good News” is really about. Picking up where Rob Bell and others leave off, Julie Ferwerda offers compelling evidence historically, philosophically, and scripturally as to why the doctrine of eternal torment is the biggest and most damaging deception of the modern Church.

It's a research paper. This study helps us to understand how archaeology can illuminate biblical studies. However, archaeology does not have the final word on the interpretation of the Bible. The Bible has to be interpreted in its totality. Archaeology claims that the walls of Jericho did not exist at the arrival of Joshua. But ch.6 of Joshua itself has enormous textual variants between MT and  LXX. Before advocating archaeological discoveries, we need to be patient enough to understand what actually the text speaks. This is not a detailed study on Ch. 6 of Joshua. It is only an overview on the contributions of Archaeology as well as on the biblical understanding of Joshua's conquest of Jericho.

Szesnat, Holger. 2015. "Gender-Based Violence and Ephesians 5: Reflections on the Ethics, Hermeneutics and Didactics of a Community Bible Study in Suva, Fiji." In Oceanic Voyages in Theology and Theological Education: Reflections and Reminiscences in Celebration of the 50th Anniversary of the Pacific Theological College, edited by Feleterika Nokise and Holger Szesnat, 133-168. Suva, Fiji Islands: Pacific Theological College.

Josephus nailed Solomon's ff969/968 accession!: Hiram's Solomonic Temple contract in ff969/968 by Josephus' Tyrian, Greek, & Roman dating, confirms Thiele's 2005-2015 corrected chronology


Valerius Coucke's 1928-published near-dating of Tyrian King Hiram's fall-to-fall (ff) 969/968 12th year Solomonic Temple construction contract was one year late (ff968/967) only due to his misreckoning as May (sic.) 1207 BC the Parian Marble's correct ca. June 1208 BC fall of Troy. This latter was by Justin quoting Trogus (18.3) 1 year after the ca. June 1209 founding of Tyre, which in turn by Josephus quoting Meander (Ag. Ap. I.18) was 241 years before Hiram's 12th year 1 Kings 5:1 contract with Solomon to build his Temple ca. June 1209 - 241 = spring/summer 968 BC (ff969/968). Just here David died by my 2005-2015 correction of the Coucke/Thiele/McFall/Young chronology by its wholesale 3 years later offset up to Uzziah's death. Thus: {[June 1208 fall of Troy] - 1 = June 1209 refoundation of Tyre} + 241 years until Hiram's 12th year Temple contract = June 968 = spring/summer ff969/968 1 Kgs. 5:1 accession of Solomon.

The Fig. 1 Tyrian kings chronology based on Josephus' copy of Meander's Tyrian King List using only Athenian, Tyrian, and Roman records, validates Coucke's method and confirms its result by use of my chronology: Hiram's certain ff969/988 12th year start of Solomon's Temple project invalidates the Coucke/Thiele/McFall/Young version of Thiele's chronology because by it Hiram was 2 years dead when required to receive Solomon's 1 Kgs. 9:10-14 20th year construction bonus (E, 8/19). By the Thiele chronology's unavoidable 1 Kgs. 6:1 Temple assembly start, that bonus fell in Solomon's 24th year, while by my chronology's 1 Kgs. 5:1 start, it fell 2 years before Hiram's death in Solomon's 20th (sec. 2.3). A tiny wrinkle in Assyrian chronology (701 BC, E 11/19) misled Thiele to corrupt his internal biblical chronology to make it absolute.

Coucke failed to follow through in developing his near-solution to its full potential for unlocking the entire Dead Sea Scrolls-based Masoretic Text's chronology, or at least its Hebrew kings foundation as Thiele nearly did by 1943, independently of Coucke. But Coucke provided corroborating independent results anticipating Thiele's better work, further refined by Leslie McFall (1991) and R. C. Young (2003).

Dating Hiram's Temple contract with Solomon
Tyrian kings chronology synchronized to & confirming my correction of Thiele in 20 pages:

Valerius Coucke's 1928-published near-dating of Tyrian King Hiram's fall-to-fall (ff) 969/968 12th year Solomonic Temple construction contract was one year late (ff968/967) only due to his misreckoning as May (sic.) 1207 BC the Parian Marble's correct ca. June 1208 BC fall of Troy. This latter was by Justin quoting Trogus (18.3) 1 year after the ca. June 1209 founding of Tyre, which in turn by Josephus quoting Meander (Ag. Ap. I.18) was 241 years before Hiram's 12th year 1 Kings 5:1 contract with Solomon to build his Temple ca. June 1209 - 241 = spring/summer 968 BC (ff969/968). Just here David died by my 2005-2015 correction of the Coucke/Thiele/McFall/Young chronology by its wholesale 3 years later offset up to Uzziah's death. Thus: {[June 1208 fall of Troy] - 1 = June 1209 refoundation of Tyre} + 241 years until Hiram's 12th year Temple contract = June 968 = spring/summer ff969/968 1 Kgs. 5:1 accession of Solomon.

The Fig. 1 Tyrian kings chronology based on Josephus' copy of Meander's Tyrian King List using only Athenian, Tyrian, and Roman records, validates Coucke's method and confirms its result by use of my chronology: Hiram's certain ff969/988 12th year start of Solomon's Temple project invalidates the Coucke/Thiele/McFall/Young version of Thiele's chronology because by it Hiram was 2 years dead when required to receive Solomon's 1 Kgs. 9:10-14 20th year construction bonus (E, 8/19). By the Thiele chronology's unavoidable 1 Kgs. 6:1 Temple assembly start, that bonus fell in Solomon's 24th year, while by my chronology's 1 Kgs. 5:1 start, it fell 2 years before Hiram's death in Solomon's 20th (sec. 2.3). A tiny wrinkle in Assyrian chronology (701 BC, E 11/19) misled Thiele to corrupt his internal biblical chronology to make it absolute.

Coucke failed to follow through in developing his near-solution to its full potential for unlocking the entire Dead Sea Scrolls-based Masoretic Text's chronology, or at least its Hebrew kings foundation as Thiele nearly did by 1943, independently of Coucke. But Coucke provided corroborating independent results anticipating Thiele's better work, further refined by Leslie McFall (1991) and R. C. Young (2003).

My correction of Thiele's at first perfected but by afterthought marred biblical chronology builds upon its foundational part I, correcting the chronology of Sennacherib's first five years, which revealed 702 BC as the true date of Sennacherib's invasion of Judah, enabling correction of Dr. Edwin Thiele's error in his widely accepted chronology of the Hebrew kings. Part I proved that Sennacherib's third campaign, biblically recorded in king Hezekiah of Judah's 14th regnal year, did not take place in 701 BC as Thiele had trusted for the cornerstone of his chronology, but rather in 702 BC, vindicating and perfecting his work. The lion's share of credit for my having discovered the ultimate biblical chronology belongs to Thiele (1943) as given improvement and correction by his indirectly participating colleagues Valerius Coucke (1928), Leslie McFall (1991), and Rodger C. Young (2003) who advanced Thiele's work without essentially modifying its chronological structure (CTMY). CTMY made possible my solution (solved in 2005, perfected and first published in 2015). My results validate not only their work, but the Masoretic Text (MT) as confirmed by its majority Dead Sea Scrolls representation, on which this chronology is exclusively based, and into which this chronology was imperceptibly (indeed mystifyingly according to over 2 millennia of effort since the 3rd century BC LXX futile effort to make sense of it) woven into the MT as a watermark or hologram of its authenticity.

By his Assyrian cornerstone thus out of place, no other Assyrian synchronism would fit Thiele's at first perfect internal biblical chronology, "IBC", (my solution has 8). So he emended it in Jotham's reign (2 Kgs. 15:30-33), adding 4 years to Jotham to shift Ahab's disastrous 853 Battle of Qarqar (Shalmaneser III's 6th year) immediately before Ahab's 1 Kgs. 22 fatal battle against his Qarqar ally Benhadad. Thus Shalmaneser's 18th year receipt of Jehu's tribute in 841, 12 (= 18 - 6) years after Qarqar by IBC, harmonized Jehu's 841 accession with his 14th year of Hezekiah set in 701! But Thiele failed to notice that annihilation of Ahab's powerful military at Qarqar per Shalmaneser's 6th year annals, made impossible his 1 Kgs. 22 participation in his fatal war with Benhadad. Likewise Shalmaneser's 18th year annals report of Hazael's total incapacitation for his 2 Kgs. 9:15-16 wounding of Israel's Joram in battle, discredited Jehu's having killed both Joram and his sickbed visitor Judah's king Ahaziah in 841 (Appx. H, chart 2/19), stripping Thiele of all Assyrian synchronisms.

The Chronology Comparison Chart Fig. 3 exposing the difference between my and Thiele's chronologies, shows my two simple structural corrections: First Thiele's 701 BC synchronism with Hezekiah's year 14 is corrected to 702 BC. Second, Thiele's 4 fabricated years by which he (I believe honestly) found a self-deceptive pretext to lengthen Jotham's reign in order to contrive a specious but futile 853 BC Battle of Qarqar synchronism in Ahab's year of death in battle against his Qarqar ally Benhadad, are removed: Jotham's 2 Kgs. 15:30 actuarial 20th year (4 years after Jotham's death) used to synchronize Pekah's death in his official chronicle, in my chronology properly observes Jotham's official 2 Kgs. 15:33 16th regnal year of death.

One of the earliest and ultimately most fruitful clues in not only exposing Thiele's error, but confirming my entire resulting Bible chronology, was the common but hitherto unproven observation that the two fallow years in succession of 2 Kings 19:29 in Hezekiah's 14th year (Sabbatical years 7 & 1 in Fig. 3) suggested the Lev. 25:2-13 49th year of a jubilee cycle (fallow), followed in the next year by its figurative 49 + 1 = “50th” in the post-Sabbatical 7 + 1 = “8th” per Lev. 25:20-22, namely Hezekiah's 15th calendrical year (also fallow), observed on its Tishri 10 by celebration of the 49-year jubilee cycle just completed in the first year of its next sabbatical cycle, whose purpose was to establish and regulate perpetual and inalienable land ownership in ancient Israel on a jubilee cyclical ceremonial basis. This exposed the purpose of the Ezra 7:7 mission from Babylon to Jerusalem on the same 49 year cycle as that of 2 Kgs. 19:29 (arguably prophesied in Daniel 9:25 dating the start of its 70 Lev. 25 Sabbatical weeks of years, namely 10 Jubilee cycles), and likewise that of the first 2 years of Bar-Kokhba's revolt against Hadrian (introducing Appx. A), thus triply confirming Moses' jubilee cycle in synchronism with Benedict Zuckermann's sabbatical cycles.

Appendix C shows the 4 structural charts for my chronology. Appendix D offers scholarly confirmation of Thiele's biblical chronological method. Appendix E examines Sennacherib's 702 BC 3rd campaign synchronism with Hezekiah' 14th year. Appendix F discovers my 21 April 1443 Exodus date shown in Fig. 7 in proper synchronism with Amenhotep II's short and final military campaign begun on 11 November 1444 (the “Amenophis” of Mantheo, clearly the Exodus pharaoh as preserved in Josephus' “Contra Apion”). Appendix G concisely details all 25 of my extrabiblical synchronisms validating the breakthrough nature of my discovery. And Appendix H presents the complete set of my 19 key chronology charts, where my correction of Thiele in a span of 40 years is illustrated in my Chronology Comparison Chart “CCC,” shown as Fig. 11/19, also shown as Fig. [fig:Chronology-Comparison-Chart].

Appendix [sec:25-Extrabiblical-Synchronisms], “Synchronisms for Thiele's & my chronologies” lists and locates expositions of its 2 Egyptian, 8 Assyrian, 6 Babylonian, 1 Tyrian, 3 Persian, 1 Sabbatical, and two pairs = 4 of Jubilee synchronisms (49th & 50th year Jubilee pairs, extrabiblically anchored to Bar Kokhba's spring-summer of 132 AD 49th Jubilee cycle year launching his revolt against Hadrian) totalling 25. These include synchronism of the Exodus with Amenhotep II's year 10, a Tyrian and Sabbatical year synchronism with Solomon's accession, Assyrian and Jubilee synchronisms in Hezekiah's 14th and 15th years, and Persian and Jubilee synchronisms of Ezra 7:7; exposing 3 historical Jubilee years in synchronism with Benedict Zuckermann's 1857 Sabbatical cycle.

My correction of Thiele's at first perfected but by afterthought marred biblical chronology builds upon its foundational part I, correcting the chronology of Sennacherib's first five years, which revealed 702 BC as the true date of Sennacherib's invasion of Judah, enabling correction of Dr. Edwin Thiele's error in his widely accepted chronology of the Hebrew kings. Part I proved that Sennacherib's third campaign, biblically recorded in king Hezekiah of Judah's 14th regnal year, did not take place in 701 BC as Thiele had trusted for the cornerstone of his chronology, but rather in 702 BC, vindicating and perfecting his work. The lion's share of credit for my having discovered the ultimate biblical chronology belongs to Thiele (1943) as given improvement and correction by his indirectly participating colleagues Valerius Coucke (1928), Leslie McFall (1991), and Rodger C. Young (2003) who advanced Thiele's work without essentially modifying its chronological structure (CTMY). CTMY made possible my solution (solved in 2005, perfected and first published in 2015). My results validate not only their work, but the Masoretic Text (MT) as confirmed by its majority Dead Sea Scrolls representation, on which this chronology is exclusively based, and into which this chronology was imperceptibly (indeed mystifyingly according to over 2 millennia of effort since the 3rd century BC LXX futile effort to make sense of it) woven into the MT as a watermark or hologram of its authenticity.

By his Assyrian cornerstone thus out of place, no other Assyrian synchronism would fit Thiele's at first perfect internal biblical chronology, "IBC", (my solution has 8). So he emended it in Jotham's reign (2 Kgs. 15:30-33), adding 4 years to Jotham to shift Ahab's disastrous 853 Battle of Qarqar (Shalmaneser III's 6th year) immediately before Ahab's 1 Kgs. 22 fatal battle against his Qarqar ally Benhadad. Thus Shalmaneser's 18th year receipt of Jehu's tribute in 841, 12 (= 18 - 6) years after Qarqar by IBC, harmonized Jehu's 841 accession with his 14th year of Hezekiah set in 701! But Thiele failed to notice that annihilation of Ahab's powerful military at Qarqar per Shalmaneser's 6th year annals, made impossible his 1 Kgs. 22 participation in his fatal war with Benhadad. Likewise Shalmaneser's 18th year annals report of Hazael's total incapacitation for his 2 Kgs. 9:15-16 wounding of Israel's Joram in battle, discredited Jehu's having killed both Joram and his sickbed visitor Judah's king Ahaziah in 841 (Appx. H, chart 2/19), stripping Thiele of all Assyrian synchronisms.

The Chronology Comparison Chart Fig. 3 exposing the difference between my and Thiele's chronologies, shows my two simple structural corrections: First Thiele's 701 BC synchronism with Hezekiah's year 14 is corrected to 702 BC. Second, Thiele's 4 fabricated years by which he (I believe honestly) found a self-deceptive pretext to lengthen Jotham's reign in order to contrive a specious but futile 853 BC Battle of Qarqar synchronism in Ahab's year of death in battle against his Qarqar ally Benhadad, are removed: Jotham's 2 Kgs. 15:30 actuarial 20th year (4 years after Jotham's death) used to synchronize Pekah's death in his official chronicle, in my chronology properly observes Jotham's official 2 Kgs. 15:33 16th regnal year of death.

One of the earliest and ultimately most fruitful clues in not only exposing Thiele's error, but confirming my entire resulting Bible chronology, was the common but hitherto unproven observation that the two fallow years in succession of 2 Kings 19:29 in Hezekiah's 14th year (Sabbatical years 7 & 1 in Fig. 3) suggested the Lev. 25:2-13 49th year of a jubilee cycle (fallow), followed in the next year by its figurative 49 + 1 = “50th” in the post-Sabbatical 7 + 1 = “8th” per Lev. 25:20-22, namely Hezekiah's 15th calendrical year (also fallow), observed on its Tishri 10 by celebration of the 49-year jubilee cycle just completed in the first year of its next sabbatical cycle, whose purpose was to establish and regulate perpetual and inalienable land ownership in ancient Israel on a jubilee cyclical ceremonial basis. This exposed the purpose of the Ezra 7:7 mission from Babylon to Jerusalem on the same 49 year cycle as that of 2 Kgs. 19:29 (arguably prophesied in Daniel 9:25 dating the start of its 70 Lev. 25 Sabbatical weeks of years, namely 10 Jubilee cycles), and likewise that of the first 2 years of Bar-Kokhba's revolt against Hadrian (introducing Appx. A), thus triply confirming Moses' jubilee cycle in synchronism with Benedict Zuckermann's sabbatical cycles.

Appendix C shows the 4 structural charts for my chronology. Appendix D offers scholarly confirmation of Thiele's biblical chronological method. Appendix E examines Sennacherib's 702 BC 3rd campaign synchronism with Hezekiah' 14th year. Appendix F discovers my 21 April 1443 Exodus date shown in Fig. 7 in proper synchronism with Amenhotep II's short and final military campaign begun on 11 November 1444 (the “Amenophis” of Mantheo, clearly the Exodus pharaoh as preserved in Josephus' “Contra Apion”). Appendix G concisely details all 25 of my extrabiblical synchronisms validating the breakthrough nature of my discovery. And Appendix H presents the complete set of my 19 key chronology charts, where my correction of Thiele in a span of 40 years is illustrated in my Chronology Comparison Chart “CCC,” shown as Fig. 11/19, also shown as Fig. 3.

Appendix G, “Synchronisms for Thiele's & my chronologies” lists and locates expositions of its 2 Egyptian, 8 Assyrian, 6 Babylonian, 1 Tyrian, 3 Persian, 1 Sabbatical, and two pairs = 4 of Jubilee synchronisms (49th & 50th year Jubilee pairs, extrabiblically anchored to Bar Kokhba's spring-summer of 132 AD 49th Jubilee cycle year launching his revolt against Hadrian) totalling 25. These include synchronism of the Exodus with Amenhotep II's year 10, a Tyrian and Sabbatical year synchronism with Solomon's accession, Assyrian and Jubilee synchronisms in Hezekiah's 14th and 15th years, and Persian and Jubilee synchronisms of Ezra 7:7; exposing 3 historical Jubilee years in synchronism with Benedict Zuckermann's 1857 Sabbatical cycle.

Interpretational approaches to 1 Thessalonians tend either to (excessively) problematise and question the ‘authoritative voice of Paul,’ or to (naively) lionise that same voice, thereby creating a deep tension between what amounts to an academic and a faith based or ecclesial approach. The tension is made all the more palpable when the discursive-rhetorical role of the biblical text is considered in relation to the construction and representation of masculinity. Broadly speaking, then, critical approaches are the province of the academy, while approaches that affirm the normativising role and centrality of Paul, belong to the church. The latter approach, which I characterise as pre-critical and/or ideologically biased, narrowly construes the possibilities for masculine identity construction and representation by seeing masculinity as fixed and stable. Textual engagement conforms to the more traditional approaches of interpretation which, while elucidating likely historical and textual frameworks for meaning-making, tend to either be agnostic about the gendered nature and discursive quality of the text, or downplay the presence of gendered bodies altogether. Critical approaches, by contrast, bring the gendered nature of the text into sharper relief, but often in inaccessible ways. By critical, I mean, approaches specifically aimed at paying meticulous attention to aspects of 1 Thessalonians that are assumed, on ideological/theological grounds, to be precluded from an investigation of the meaning of the text. In other words, while some critical approaches to 1 Thessalonians problematise the text (and its interpretations), not all critical approaches are interested in the question of gender generally, and of masculinity, specifically. At the centre of this dissertation, then, is the question of how 1 Thessalonians reveals a discursively constructed and represented masculinity and draws on the critical optic of gender criticism and postcolonial biblical criticism to “offer more language and recognition to those who found [find] themselves ostracised because they did [do] not confirm (sic.) to restrictive ideas of what it means to be a man or a woman” (quotation from Judith Butler, in Jaschik, 2017). The objective, moreover, for developing and applying this optic to 1 Thessalonians, is to model ethically responsible hermeneutics and in the context of masculinity, break open the narrow ways in which the biblical text is often interpreted and used to shape the “biblical” notion of masculinity (and femininity). In this study, I maintain that the polysemy of the biblical text, especially when read through the lens of gender criticism and postcolonial biblical criticism, together with an understanding of the discursive-rhetorical dimensions of the text, invites wider possibilities for identity construction and representation. This is crystallised in the transgendering which Paul, Silvanus and Timothy seem to adopt in the letter to the Thessalonian assembly.

Israel’s wisdom tradition reflects a profound and beautiful breadth in its ability to bring a wide range of lived experience to speech within an intentionally theological framework. Such breadth is evidenced in the number of genres, the variety of rhetorical devices employed in the tradition, and the use of existing source materials. All this suggests that this literature is both porous—allowing for a kind of literary freedom of ideas—and responsive to the existential realities of life. It is my contention that Israel’s wisdom tradition exemplifies a theological flexibility that allows it to draw on the rich wisdom that emerges from individual and communal reflection upon lived experiences. At the same time, the wisdom tradition also reflects a tendency towards theological certitude whereby some voices were silenced and others amplified in the service of those who exercised power. This rich tradition, then, reflects a deep tension between localised and centralised wisdom and challenges us to consider the tendency to silence the voice of dissident wisdom and invites us to re-appropriate the value and importance of local wisdom in our theological discourse.

Biblical Performance Criticism (BPC) is a provincial practice with particular North American and European historical indices. When entering into a new context, this methodological genealogy needs to be recognized, because within those indices overt and covert interests are served. In order for BPC to be contextualized to serve local interests in a new location, it must recognize practices on the ground and how those practices have already been shaped or re-shaped to serve local interests. I will highlight three practices on the ground in the Bikɔɔm context of Ghana to see how their ideological pathways have been (re)shaped to serve local interests: written Bible translation, oral tradition, and preaching. I will discuss two examples where written Bible translation has partially imitated the pathways of oral tradition and sermonic practice to better serve local interests. Then I will discuss the material dimensions of written Bibles and oral tradition as instructive for the way BPC materially contextualizes. Finally, I will suggest that if Contextual Bible Study as developed in South Africa, could be adapted for the Bikɔɔm context, it could be helpful to Bible interpreters, translators and performers as they seek to embed their Bible practices in locally controlled ways that foster local liberation.

This article offers insights into the narrative of the Gerasene Demoniac (Luke 8:26-39) from grassroots interpreters in Owamboland, Namibia. The participants' perspectives on the 'Living Landscape'—contextualised against a background of Owambo ethnographic data— disrupt understandings of landscapes and spirits found in Western-centric professional biblical scholarship. This illustrates the potential of Contextual Bible Study (or variants thereof) both to bring forth original interpretive insights and to capitalise on particular cultural contexts as sites of expertise.

Initially presented at the "Mennonites and Friends" forum held at the Society of Biblical Literature meetings in November, 2010,this appreciative response questions Seibert's central thesis re: the need to distinguish between the "textual God" and the "actual God," and then to prioritize the latter. Through a brief case study of Jonah in the book of the twelve/Minor Prophets I argue that such an approach does not adequately recognize the significance and function of the diversity of perspectives on God within Scripture. I suggest that Seibert also gives too much weight to historical reference and point to the nature of Scripture as a theological witness as an improved alternative. In doing so I also provide a more pragmatic, contextual and pedagogical critique of the implications of his approach for studying the Bible with lay people and briefly point to an alternative approach.

Kita pasti punya pengalaman meminta kepada bapa kita. Entah itu duit, barang kecil, sederhana maupun mewah. Minta waktu, perhatian, bermain, bercanda, dan lain sebagainya. Itu wajar dan manusiawi. Persoalannya adalah apakah setiap permintaan kita pasti akan dikabulkan bapak kita? Belum tentu. Bisa saja bapak kita tida mengabulkannya karena belum waktunya untuk kita. Misalnya, anak SD minta motor. Pastilah seorang ayah tidak akan mengabulkannya karena itu tidak cocok bagi anak itu. Artinya, seorang ayah pasti mempertimbangkan setiap permohonan seorang anak kepadanya. Pertimbangan itulah yang terbaik bagi anaknya.

Efesus 4:24 (TB) "Dan mengenakan manusia baru, yang telah diciptakan menurut kehendak Allah di dalam kebenaran dan kekudusan yang sesungguhnya" Ephesians 4:24 (NET) "And to put on the new man who has been created in God's image-in righteousness and holiness that comes from truth" Manusia baru dan lama tidak bisa bersatu di dalam diri kita. Kita tidak bisa memainkan dua karakter yang kontras sekaligus, seperti hidup sebagai orang yang jujur tetapi di saat yang sama juga suka berbohong. Sebab, mengenakan manusia baru berarti memiliki sifat-sifat baru yang sangat berbeda dengan sifat lama. Jika kita membaca sifat manusia lama yang dimaksudkan oleh Paulus kepada jemaat Efesus, semuanya adalah hal yang bertentangan dengan kebenaran. Sebaliknya, sifat manusia baru selaras dengan kebenaran firman Tuhan dan menuntun kita kepada kedewasaan rohani. Karena itu, jika dulu kita adalah orang yang selalu mementingkan diri sendiri, maka marilah kita mulai belajar untuk memedulikan orang lain. Jadi, sebagai orang percaya, marilah kita memasuki tahun ini dengan satu komitmen untuk meninggalkan sifat lama yang masih ada di dalam diri kita dan mengenakan sifat baru yang berkenan kepada Allah. Dengan demikian kita akan terus mengalami kemajuan di dalam kehidupan rohani kita. Istilah manusia baru dan manusia lama kerap kali diungkapkan Paulus dalam surat-suratnya. Manusia lama adalah manusia yang hidup di dalam dosa manusia yang belum percaya kepada Yesus Kristus sehingga hidupnya penuh dengan kecemaran, memiliki pikiran yang sia-sia, hati yang gelap, jauh dari Allah,bodoh dan degil sehingga mereka menyerahkan dirinya kepada hawa nafsu dan berbuat segala kecemaran. Sedangkan manusia baru adalah manusia yang sudah mengalami kasih Tuhan, percaya kepada Tuhan Yesus Kristus sehingga gaya hidupnya menjadi gaya hidup yang berbeda,menanggalkan manusia lama dan hidupnya tidak lagi di dalam dosa tapi hidup di dalam terang kasih Tuhan dengan mengenakan manusia baru yang telah diciptakan menurut kehendak Allah di dalam kebenaran dan kekudusan yang sesungguhnya. Dan ciri-ciri gaya hidup manusia baru adalah tidak berdusta, tidak pemarah,tidak mencuri, tidak berkata kotor dll.

This  paper  explores  how  Christiane  Nord’s  ethic  of  translator  loyalty could  be  invigorated  in  African  Bible  translation  by  engaging the social  commitments  of  Contextual  Bible  Study,  a  practice  of  Bible reading  and  action  developed  in  South  Africa.  After  describing  Nord’s  concept  of  loyalty  and  its  prevalence  in  African  Bible  translation,  the  paper  notes  the  challenge  of  practicing  loyalty amidst  complex  power  dynamics  in  the  post-colonial context of Ghana. The paper then imagines how Christiane Nord’s four poles of translator loyalty could be reconfigured if they included  the  social  commitments  and  interpretative  practices  of  Contextual Bible Study. The goal is to situate translators so they can produce  a  translation  that  offers  details  from  critical  scholarship  and  from  actual  Contextual  Bible  Study  experiences  which  marginalised  groups  in  their audience  may  find  liberating.  An  experimental English translation of Job 3 is included for reference.

The Sabbath often runs the risk of being reduced to the idea of simple rest. However, Exodus 31:12–17 proves the Sabbath to be one of the most important concepts of the Torah. It connects the royal priesthood, sanctification, the tabernacle, and creation all together with a common thread that runs throughout each idea. The Sabbath is key to ensuring and enabling the Israelites to fulfill their role as a kingdom of priests as outlined in Exod 19:4–6.

Renungan hari ini: DI DALAM DIA KITA DIBENARKAN 2 Korintus 5:21 (TB) "Dia yang tidak mengenal dosa telah dibuat-Nya menjadi dosa karena kita, supaya dalam Dia kita dibenarkan oleh Allah" 2 Corinthians 5:21 (NET) "God made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we would become the righteousness of God" Manusia tidak bisa membenarkan dirinya sendiri. Segala usaha pembenaran diri manusia selalu gagal. Manusia yang berdosa tidak akan bisa berdamai dengan ALLAH yang Maha Kudus. Perdamaian manusia berdosa hanya terjadi melalui Yesus. Yesus yang tidak berdosa dijadikan berdosa menggantikan manusia yang berdosa agar manusia yang berdosa itu menjadi kudus dan suci. Dengan kekudusan manusia oleh Yesus itulah membuat manusia bisa bertemu dan berdamai dengan ALLAH. Pernyataan "Di dalam Dia kita dibenarkan" dapat kita temukan dalam 2 Korintus 5:21 yang merupakan sebuah konklusi yang menakjubkan dari seorang rasul Paulus. Ia menyatakan bahwa Yesus yang tak berdosa sama sekali dalam totalitasnya, telah dibuat oleh Allah menjadi dosa. Tetapi ketakjuban itu tak sampai di situ saja, karena Paulus menunjukan apakah tujuan Allah membuatnya menjadi dosa karena kita, yaitu supaya dalam Dia kita dibenarkan oleh Allah. Inilah satu-satunya manusia yang dijadikan berdosa untuk menghasilkan pembenaran bagi kita dalam sebuah cara yang menunjukan bahwa sekalipun Ia telah dibuat-Nya berdosa, sama sekali tak menjadikan Yesus adalah taklukan dosa, tetapi seorang penakluk dan pembebas manusia dari kuasa dosa, yang dalam bahasa Paulus: dalam Dia kita dibenarkan oleh Allah. Wujud bahwa memang benar Yesus telah dibuat Allah menjadi dosa, sungguh begitu vulgar, dan pasti siapapun akan sulit untuk tidak mengatakan bahwa Dia adalah manusia berdosa, jika tidak mengapa Allah membiarkannya dalam sengsara dan salib? Mari kita perhatikan rentet catatan Alkitab berikut ini yang akan mengantarkan kita untuk mendapatkan gambaran besar pada bagaimana Yesus memasuki sebuah fase kehidupan sebagai seorang pesakitan atau terdakwa dengan dakwaan seorang manusia yang sangat bersalah dan sangat tercela, sekalipun ia terbukti secara publik sebagai manusia tanpa salah sama sekali:

How can Contextual Bible Study, which was developed in South Africa and which seeks to affirm expressions of local liberation through a process of community Bible interpretation, be re-contextualized in a different postcolonial context without operating in neocolonial modes? In Ghana the “public transcript” between the Bikɔɔm people and outside entities entails local groups affirming what the outside entity is proposing while looking for ways to glean from the interaction. This paper recounts an attempt to circumvent the typical scenario by attempting to create safe spaces through Contextual Bible Study which resulted in reading Job 2-3 with people living with disabilities in Gbintiri, Ghana. It also critiques the formation, implementation, exegetical insight, and praxis stemming from the study and includes assessment of the Contextual Bible Study methodology itself.

The search for a readily identifiable situation as the context for understanding the laments may, however, be illusory or unnecessary. The language of these psalms with its stereotypical, generalizing, and figurative style is so open-ended that later readers, on the one hand, are stopped from peering behind them to one or more clearly definable sets of circumstances or settings in life, and on the other hand, are intentionally set free to adapt them to varying circumstances and settings. (Miller 1986:8, [authors' own italics]) An HIV and AIDS gender-sensitive biblical hermeneutic is first and foremost contextual. It seriously takes into account the experiences of HIV and AIDS women sufferers. As African women are the hardest hit by the pandemic of HIV and AIDS in South Africa, our HIV and AIDS gender-conscious re-reading of Psalm 6 will be informed first and foremost by the experiences of these women. Before we give a brief overview of African women's experiences, the following narrative is in order. In December 2014, Madipoane Masenya (ngwan'a Mphahlele) participated in an HIV and AIDS workshop which occurred at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, IL, USA. One of the keynote speakers was the Rev. Dr Jeremiah Wright, Bishop Emeritus at the Trinity Church in Chicago. While Dr Wright commended South Africa (cf. at least compared to the USA) for the strides the country has made regarding the fight against HIV and AIDS, he also added a critique. Dr Wright noted that it was in South Africa that the President is reported to have cleansed himself from the HIV in a shower! Although the preceding critique could be viewed as based on an issue that may be deemed to belong to the dustbin of history, an important question we ask is: what may the institution of polygyny contribute to our communal struggle in the fight against the pandemic of HIV and AIDS? Although it might be argued that the (mostly younger) women who are now South Africa's many first ladies were not coerced into such a risky form of marriage in The genre of laments (both individual and communal) can be traced historically, even up to today, to periods of crisis. The psalms of lament in the Hebrew Bible point to periods both of national crisis such as wars, exile, and individual crisis, namely attacks from enemies and illness among others. The crisis of the exile was typified by death (in the literal and metaphorical sense), pestilence, disease and war. It was also typified by hope as some of the prophets such as Jeremiah could prophesy both doom (read: death) and salvation (read: hope). If there is any crisis that people of African descent, particularly those located within the sub-Saharan continent, have ever come to experience it is the crisis brought by the pandemic of HIV and AIDS. The pandemic is better approached by scholars who hold the view that it is multisectoral. According to the latter view, the pandemic impacts the social, the economic, the religious or spiritual, and the psychological lives of both the affected and the infected. It is a justice issue. It can thus not be relegated to the individual because it is communal. Is it any wonder that in 2002 the members of the Circle of Concerned African Women Theologians set out to theologise and conduct God-talk that would be both gender-and HIV and AIDS-conscious? In this article, we engage the works of Circle theologians and biblical scholars to see what kind of reading could emerge if we re-read the lament psalm, such as Psalm 6, gender and HIV and AIDS consciously. Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: In this article, the disciplines of biblical studies, gender studies, and HIV and AIDS studies, among others, converge as the authors draw from Circle theologies and biblical hermeneutics to re-read Psalm 6 through an HIV and AIDS lens. In the process, issues such as patriarchy, poverty and social justice are also dealt with.

Provides basic information on every book in the bible for church people. It is written in both English and Samoan. Information such as the background, meanings of names and places, period and time, who wrote the book and a 3-4 summary of each book. An outline of the stories in each book is also given.

Setelah minggu yang lalu membahas mengenai Israel dalam hubungannya dengan Allah dalam konteks ritual atau Ibadah, bagian ini nampaknya memulai suatu pembicaraan yang baru. Sejalan dengan Francis Landy yang mengatakan bahwa bagian ini merupakan bagian yang baru dan ditandai dengan ungkapan "Dengarlah ini !" (5:1) 1 , saya juga berpendapat demikian karena dari sudut pandang isinya juga membicarakan hal yang berbeda. Bagian ini menurut saya lebih banyak membicarakan hubungan antara Allah dan Isreal (lih. 5:1) yang retak karena kesalahan yang dibuat oleh Bangsa Israel. Pemahaman mengenai hubungan atau relasi tersebut memicu saya kemudian untuk mengajak Teologi Proses menjadi teman dialog dalam merenungkan bagian ini. Teologi Proses meyakini bahwa segala sesuatu di dunia ini ada dalam relasi dan terus berubah karenanya, termasuk Allah. 2 Proses yang dialami bersama dalam relasi tersebut akan menjadi penuntun bagi saya untuk sedikit "mengocok-ngocok" bagian alkitab ini, karena menarik melihat bagaimana relasi itu kemudian mempengaruhi bangsa ini dan mempengaruhi Allah. Anyway, Ini hanya karya imajinatif saya dengan harapan agar PA ini tidak membosankan dan provokatif.

The genre of laments (both individual and communal) can be traced historically, even up to today, to periods of crisis. The psalms of lament in the Hebrew Bible point to periods both of national crisis such as wars, exile, and individual crisis, namely attacks from enemies and illness among others. The crisis of the exile was typified by death (in the literal and metaphorical sense), pestilence, disease and war. It was also typified by hope as some of the prophets such as Jeremiah could prophesy both doom (read: death) and salvation (read: hope). If there is any crisis that people of African descent, particularly those located within the sub-Saharan continent, have ever come to experience it is the crisis brought by the pandemic of HIV and AIDS. The pandemic is better approached by scholars who hold the view that it is multisectoral. According to the latter view, the pandemic impacts the social, the economic, the religious or spiritual, and the psychological lives of both the affect...

Unterrichtsmaterial für eine Gastsitzung im Seminar "Armut und Reichtum im Neuen Testament", auf freundliche Einladung von Prof. Dr. Claudia Janssen und Prof. Dr. Carsten Jochum-Bortfeld, an der Kirchlichen Hochschule Wuppertal (17. Dez. 2019). Nach dem Modell der Contextual Bible Study (Ujamaa Institute, Südafrika).

How is the Bible read in actual fact by people in a secular context? This question drives the course The Bible in a Secular Setting: Contextual Biblical Interpretation in the Netherlands. The course explores both research into the use of the Bible and the approaches to the Bible by “ordinary readers”. The program includes discussions research into the factual use of the Bible and views of it, an exploration of methods for the empirical study of biblical interpretation, and seminars on the contextually sensitive use of the Bible in new missionary initiatives and in marginal parts of society.

In the 104 years of the existence of the African National Congress (ANC), many a black person in South Africa has been exclusively led by men. Also, 24 years into a democracy, patriarchy continues to raise its ugly head in our parliament, among other institutions. Against the call for
a female presidential leadership Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, the National Union of Mineworkers, together with the ANC leadership in the Gauteng province, are lobbying for a male presidential candidate, namely, Cyril Ramaphosa. In order to engage the issue of patriarchy in the South African politics, the Sepedi or Northern Sotho proverb Tša etwa ke ye tshadi pele, di wela ka leope [once they are led by a female one, that is, a cow, they will fall into a donga] will be employed as a hermeneutical tool to re-read the Deuteronomistic Athaliah the bosadi way. The interest of the preceding way lies in seeking justice for the transformation of many an African woman’s life in present day South Africa. In the end, this article will investigate whether the tenor of the Northern Sotho or Sepedi proverb that once they (cattle [read: South Africans]) are led by a female, they are sure to fall into a donga.
Intradisciplinary and interdisciplinary implications: Drawing from the insight in the fields of the Old Testament, gender and social sciences studies as well as Indigenous Knowledge Systems (with particular focus on an African proverb), this article addresses the
topic of the South African Female Presidential Leadership and the Deuteronomistic Athaliah the bosadi way.

在台灣工作多年，我發現許多新領洗的教友為了擺脫舊習而接受新的基督徒生活方式的辛苦。在皈依基督之前，他們可能崇拜了各種的神靈。海神信仰的媽祖、王爺、玉皇大帝、王母娘娘是台灣所崇拜的主要神明。除此之外，還有許多其他代表雷電，閃電，風，雨，山脈，河流，農田，水井和橋樑的較小的神像，例如土地公，觀音等。台灣民間信仰或民間宗教還包括祖先的崇拜，特別是在農曆新年和清明節時舉行的。

上述的台灣宗教生活與第一世紀的格林多市相似。現代台灣基督徒和公元一世紀的格林多基督徒面臨同樣的問題：「基督徒可吃祭邪神的肉嗎？」（格8:1）。由於台灣和格林多之間在宗教活動上有很多相似之處，因此我們先要觀察保祿如何解決當時格林多市區的祭祀邪神食品問題，以便能夠回答台灣基督徒所提出的問題。

Salah satu penemuan paling menarik di bidang gerontologi (ilmu mengenai orang lanjut usia) adalah bahwa setiap orang ternyata sekaligus memiliki tiga usia yang berbeda: Usia kronologis yang dinyatakan dalam jumlah tahun seseorang hidup; usia biologis yang dinyatakan dengan kondisi atau keadaan kesehatan tubuh seseorang dan yang terakhir adalah usia psikologis yang diukur dari bagaimana seseorang merasa dan bertindak sebagai orang yang lanjut usia (lansia).

Pengakuan Daud bahwa TUHAN adalah gembala hidupnya lahir dari sebuah penderitaan yang sedang dialaminya. Dia sedang berada dalam sebuah pelarian dari kejaran pembunuhan dirinya dari raja Saul ketika itu. Di tengah situasi yang tidak baik, Daud merefleksikan ALLAH sebagai gembal dalam dirinya. Daud memberikan satu penegasan bahwa, dalam hidupnya, Tuhan digambarkan sebagai sosok gembala. Kita mengamati bahwa seorang gembala tidak pernah jauh dari domba-dombanya. Gembala mengenal dombanya dan demikian sebaliknya. Tugas seorang gembala sangatlah penting. Dia tidak saja mencukupi kebutuhan domba dengan memberi mereka makan, juga berjaga-jaga dari ancaman musuh. Gembala selalu bersama-sama dengan domba-dombanya. Itulah sebabnya dari sisi domba, dirinya akan merasa aman selama dia berada disamping gembalanya.

Bersyukur kepada TUHAN merupakan respons kita atas segala kebaikan TUHAN dalam hidup kita. Kebaikan-Nya harus kita syukuri dengan hati yang sungguh. Yang dimaksudkan Paulus dengan syukur di sini adalah syukur yang keluar dari hati yang terdalam! Syukur karena mempunyai pengalaman hidup bersama Tuhan secara nyata, bukan karena cerita atau menurut kata orang. Paulus mempunyai pengalaman tersendiri bersama Tuhan yang menguatkannya. Dalam seluruh pelayanannya, baik dalam keadaan suka maupun duka, senang ataupun susah, sehat maupun sakit, semua itu benar-benar dirasakan dan dialaminya dengan ditopang oleh kekuatan Tuhan saja.

An 'interactive Bible Study' on Eph 5:21-33 with an ecumenical gathering of Christians (women and men), meeting in Suva, Fiji Islands, on 4 December 2014, as part of "16 Days of Activism against Gender Violence" programme organised by the Suva Christian Network (Talanoa).