圣经和礼拜仪式

Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1177/00145246231191325
Esther Elliott
{"title":"圣经和礼拜仪式","authors":"Esther Elliott","doi":"10.1177/00145246231191325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"sources, illuminated by sociological studies that feature the relational rather than economic dimensions of gift-giving. In the Greco-Roman world gifts ‘create and sustain social ties’ (p. 81). With this understanding of gifts, Griffiths studies three summary statements in Acts (2:42-47; 4:32-35; 5:12-16) and strives to elucidate the nature of their relationship to the gift (dōrea) of the Spirit (e.g., Acts 2:38; 10:45). Griffiths asks, ‘What type of personal relationship does Luke portray . . . by God giving the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost?’ (p. 209). Consistent with current trends, Griffiths offers an expansive answer. In successive chapters he argues that the gift of the Spirit produces: witness, teaching, signs, and joy (chap 5); prayer, praise, and gratitude (chap 6); as well as communal sharing and unity (chaps 8-10). Griffiths concludes, ‘the gift of the Spirit affects every area of life’ (p. 210). Griffith is to be commended for his clear prose, thorough research, and numerous creative insights. He helpfully highlights the social significance of common meals (pp. 155-172) and acknowledges the difference between the views of the Essenes and the Jesus community with respect to possessions, noting the former practiced ‘shared ownership,’ the latter ‘shared access’ (pp. 157, 182). Griffiths’ study has two significant limitations. First, his analysis is limited to passages that speak of the Spirit as a gift and a few summary statements in Acts. Griffiths ignores the bulk of what Luke actually states about the Spirit. Thus, his conclusions are built upon a tenuous, untested, foundation. Secondly, Griffiths chooses to analyze Luke’s gift-giving language against the backdrop of the Greco-Roman rather than Jewish sources. Yet, in view of Luke’s numerous references to the LXX (e.g., Joel 3:1-5; cf. Num 11:29) and his portrayal of the Spirit as the source of prophetic inspiration (i.e., inspired speech and charismatic wisdom; Acts 2:17-21; cf. Luke 10:1-16), the Jewish background appears to be the more reliable guide. These limitations, I would argue, restrict Griffiths’s view. For example, on the basis of Luke 11:13 he asserts that the gift of the Spirit is ‘the ultimate good gift’ (p. 133), which is nothing less than the ‘power’ that binds ‘believers to one another and to God’ (p. 211). However, in Luke-Acts ‘salvation’ and ‘forgiveness’ (aphesis) frequently describe God’s redemptive blessings. Are not the disciples’ gratitude to God and their generosity toward one another linked primarily to the divine aphesis, which is indirectly linked to the Spirit who inspires proclamation of the gospel (Luke 24:46-49; Acts 2:38; 5:31-32)? This might explain why the disciples need to pray for the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:9-13; 12:11-12), particularly when they are commanded to stop speaking about Jesus, after Pentecost (Acts 4:18, 31). We must be careful to read Luke on his own terms and not force him into preconceived Pauline or Johannine categories. On this point, I believe Gunkel read Luke more accurately than most contemporary scholars. Unfortunately, Griffiths uncritically follows the latter. Griffiths’s study raises numerous questions, and this too is part of its value. With this fine book Griffiths has given us all a valuable gift.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bible and Liturgy\",\"authors\":\"Esther Elliott\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00145246231191325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"sources, illuminated by sociological studies that feature the relational rather than economic dimensions of gift-giving. In the Greco-Roman world gifts ‘create and sustain social ties’ (p. 81). With this understanding of gifts, Griffiths studies three summary statements in Acts (2:42-47; 4:32-35; 5:12-16) and strives to elucidate the nature of their relationship to the gift (dōrea) of the Spirit (e.g., Acts 2:38; 10:45). Griffiths asks, ‘What type of personal relationship does Luke portray . . . by God giving the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost?’ (p. 209). Consistent with current trends, Griffiths offers an expansive answer. In successive chapters he argues that the gift of the Spirit produces: witness, teaching, signs, and joy (chap 5); prayer, praise, and gratitude (chap 6); as well as communal sharing and unity (chaps 8-10). Griffiths concludes, ‘the gift of the Spirit affects every area of life’ (p. 210). Griffith is to be commended for his clear prose, thorough research, and numerous creative insights. He helpfully highlights the social significance of common meals (pp. 155-172) and acknowledges the difference between the views of the Essenes and the Jesus community with respect to possessions, noting the former practiced ‘shared ownership,’ the latter ‘shared access’ (pp. 157, 182). Griffiths’ study has two significant limitations. First, his analysis is limited to passages that speak of the Spirit as a gift and a few summary statements in Acts. Griffiths ignores the bulk of what Luke actually states about the Spirit. Thus, his conclusions are built upon a tenuous, untested, foundation. Secondly, Griffiths chooses to analyze Luke’s gift-giving language against the backdrop of the Greco-Roman rather than Jewish sources. Yet, in view of Luke’s numerous references to the LXX (e.g., Joel 3:1-5; cf. Num 11:29) and his portrayal of the Spirit as the source of prophetic inspiration (i.e., inspired speech and charismatic wisdom; Acts 2:17-21; cf. Luke 10:1-16), the Jewish background appears to be the more reliable guide. These limitations, I would argue, restrict Griffiths’s view. For example, on the basis of Luke 11:13 he asserts that the gift of the Spirit is ‘the ultimate good gift’ (p. 133), which is nothing less than the ‘power’ that binds ‘believers to one another and to God’ (p. 211). However, in Luke-Acts ‘salvation’ and ‘forgiveness’ (aphesis) frequently describe God’s redemptive blessings. Are not the disciples’ gratitude to God and their generosity toward one another linked primarily to the divine aphesis, which is indirectly linked to the Spirit who inspires proclamation of the gospel (Luke 24:46-49; Acts 2:38; 5:31-32)? This might explain why the disciples need to pray for the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:9-13; 12:11-12), particularly when they are commanded to stop speaking about Jesus, after Pentecost (Acts 4:18, 31). We must be careful to read Luke on his own terms and not force him into preconceived Pauline or Johannine categories. On this point, I believe Gunkel read Luke more accurately than most contemporary scholars. Unfortunately, Griffiths uncritically follows the latter. Griffiths’s study raises numerous questions, and this too is part of its value. With this fine book Griffiths has given us all a valuable gift.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00145246231191325\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00145246231191325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
Bible and Liturgy
sources, illuminated by sociological studies that feature the relational rather than economic dimensions of gift-giving. In the Greco-Roman world gifts ‘create and sustain social ties’ (p. 81). With this understanding of gifts, Griffiths studies three summary statements in Acts (2:42-47; 4:32-35; 5:12-16) and strives to elucidate the nature of their relationship to the gift (dōrea) of the Spirit (e.g., Acts 2:38; 10:45). Griffiths asks, ‘What type of personal relationship does Luke portray . . . by God giving the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost?’ (p. 209). Consistent with current trends, Griffiths offers an expansive answer. In successive chapters he argues that the gift of the Spirit produces: witness, teaching, signs, and joy (chap 5); prayer, praise, and gratitude (chap 6); as well as communal sharing and unity (chaps 8-10). Griffiths concludes, ‘the gift of the Spirit affects every area of life’ (p. 210). Griffith is to be commended for his clear prose, thorough research, and numerous creative insights. He helpfully highlights the social significance of common meals (pp. 155-172) and acknowledges the difference between the views of the Essenes and the Jesus community with respect to possessions, noting the former practiced ‘shared ownership,’ the latter ‘shared access’ (pp. 157, 182). Griffiths’ study has two significant limitations. First, his analysis is limited to passages that speak of the Spirit as a gift and a few summary statements in Acts. Griffiths ignores the bulk of what Luke actually states about the Spirit. Thus, his conclusions are built upon a tenuous, untested, foundation. Secondly, Griffiths chooses to analyze Luke’s gift-giving language against the backdrop of the Greco-Roman rather than Jewish sources. Yet, in view of Luke’s numerous references to the LXX (e.g., Joel 3:1-5; cf. Num 11:29) and his portrayal of the Spirit as the source of prophetic inspiration (i.e., inspired speech and charismatic wisdom; Acts 2:17-21; cf. Luke 10:1-16), the Jewish background appears to be the more reliable guide. These limitations, I would argue, restrict Griffiths’s view. For example, on the basis of Luke 11:13 he asserts that the gift of the Spirit is ‘the ultimate good gift’ (p. 133), which is nothing less than the ‘power’ that binds ‘believers to one another and to God’ (p. 211). However, in Luke-Acts ‘salvation’ and ‘forgiveness’ (aphesis) frequently describe God’s redemptive blessings. Are not the disciples’ gratitude to God and their generosity toward one another linked primarily to the divine aphesis, which is indirectly linked to the Spirit who inspires proclamation of the gospel (Luke 24:46-49; Acts 2:38; 5:31-32)? This might explain why the disciples need to pray for the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:9-13; 12:11-12), particularly when they are commanded to stop speaking about Jesus, after Pentecost (Acts 4:18, 31). We must be careful to read Luke on his own terms and not force him into preconceived Pauline or Johannine categories. On this point, I believe Gunkel read Luke more accurately than most contemporary scholars. Unfortunately, Griffiths uncritically follows the latter. Griffiths’s study raises numerous questions, and this too is part of its value. With this fine book Griffiths has given us all a valuable gift.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1