New Testament Social Ethics For Today (R.N. Longenecker) PDF
New Testament Social Ethics For Today (R.N. Longenecker) PDF
New Testament Social Ethics For Today (R.N. Longenecker) PDF
•'
. -. . .
0 •
·.
' .· .
,. I ' '
·. .
.. . . .. . : .. ·' ...
• •
. . . :0. •• ... •;." •. ,, .•
' • • o o I • o
• \ •• 0 • • ... \.
.' - . .
. . ........ '· ~- ·. -
.~ .:· :.. . ~ ... ...
1..ongeneckets exposition of the major contours of New
Testament social ethics is nothing less than brilliant
I heartily commend this book to all who seek to take
GOO)s Word seriously... -W. WARDCASQUE
WIL B. 'RmlDMANS
PUBLISHING 00.
Gf-'~11.... 9
NEW TESTAMENT
SOCIAL ETHICS
FOR
TODAY
Richard N. Longenecker
Introduction ix
v
vi Contents
The content of this little book stems from four lectures I gave
on "The Relevance of New Testament Social Ethi.::s for Today"
at the Wycliffe College Clergy School during November 1979.
In whole or in part, I then used the material in a number of
study sessions at various Anglican, Baptist, anc.: Presbyterian
churches in the Toronto area, and I presented abridged por-
tions of it at various learned society meetings in North Amer-
ica. I also presented the material in a lectureship sponsored
by Inter-Varsity at Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, On-
tario, in October 1981; as the Nils W. Lund Memorial Lectures
at North Park Theological Seminary, Chicago, Iliinois, in Oc-
tober 1982; and as the Fall Lectures at Ashland Theological
Seminary, Ashland, Ohio, in October 1983.
I've learned much from all who have written on the sub-
ject (see footnotes and bibliography) and from those who in-
teracted with the presentations in public sessions. In effect,
I've "stood on the shoulders" of many, and I thank you all!
RICHARD N. LONGENECKER
vii
INTRODUCTION
ix
x New Testament Social Ethics for Today
Religious Studies Review, 2 (January 1976), 17-23, discusses the debate from
a history-of-religions perspective; Reginald H. Fuller, in "What is Happen-
ing in New Testament Studies?" Saint Luke's Journal of Theology, 23 (1980),
90-100, discusses it from a salvation-history stance.
Introduction xi
the Bible are always set in relational contexts. Israel had been
brought into covenant relationship with God, and Jewish life
was to be lived in response to that relationship and with the
interests of the community always in view. Christians have
also been brought into covenant relationship with God through
Christ, and our lives are likewise to be lived in response to
that relationship and with the interests of the corporate Body
of Christ always in view. So morality according to the Bible
is not something either received in isolation or expressed in
isolation. Rather, it is that which proclaims by its every en-
deavor an existing relationship with God and which works
itself out always with the particular circumstances of people
in view. In that sense, therefore, biblical ethics may legiti-
mately be called contextual or situational ethics-though per-
haps, as some would insist, only after considerable disinfecting
and rebaptizing of those terms for more appropriate use.
16
A Developmental Hermeneutic 17
of the Kingdom, who can therefore bring forth from a well-stored mind the
old, i.e., the riches of Old Testament truth, and the new, i.e., the riches of
the new teaching of Jesus" (The Gospel according to Matthew LCambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1963], p. 108); David Hill: "What is new and
what is old: these phrases probably connote either traditional Jewish teach-
ing on the Kingdom of God which had now been renewed c:..>mpletely by
the presence of Jesus, or the ancient OT promises which hac, found fulfil-
ment in Jesus' person and teaching" (The Gospel of Matthew [London: Mar-
shall, Morgan & Scott, 1972], p. 240). Cf. also the commentaries by T. H.
Robinson, R. V. G. Tasker, F. V. Filson, W. F. Albright, et al.
18 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
ing of the words" (S. Matthew, in the Cambridge Greek Testament, ed.
A. Nairne [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1950], p. 141). F. C.
Grant wrote, "This precious saying described the Christian teacher," but
preferred to say nothing as to what it might mean (in Nelson's Bible Com-
mentary, VI [New York: Thomas Nelson, 1962], 78).
4 E.g., E. Schweizer: "The true teacher of the Law has learned from
Jesus to see both the old and the new together (cf. Wisd. 8:8)-God's Law,
and its new interpretation proclaimed by Jesus and realized in all that he
does. Or is Matthew thinking of Jesus' own teaching, and its new inter-
pretation in the 'learned' decisions of the community of disciples (16:19;
18:18)?" (The Good News according to Matthew, trans. D. E. Green [Atlanta:
John Knox, 1975], p. 315); F. W. Beare: "The 'old' and the 'new' could mean
the ancient Law of Israel, written and oral, on the one hand; and the inter-
pretation and application given to it by Jesus, on the other. But we are
tempted to feel that for the evangelist it means the tradition of the teaching
given by Jesus and the interpretation and application which is now supplied
by the evangelist" (The Gospel According to Matthew [San Francisco: Harper
& Row, 1981], p. 317).
A Developmental Henneneutic 19
his personal relations with his people (e.g., through the cov-
enants) and his redemptive activity on their behalf (e.g., in
the Exodus). And this progressive revelation-though im-
portant and applicable for that day-pointed forward toward
future, fuller revelations of God, which would culminate in
the coming of God's Anointed One, the Messiah (d., e.g.,
Gen. 3:15; Deut. 18:15, 18; Jer. 31:31-34; Mal. 3:1). So in the
Old Testament the Latter Prophets reinterpret the Former
Prophets and the Writings make new applications of the words
of the Law-not opposing the former, but expressing their
significance more fully and applying their message to new
situations. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this con-
junction of old and new in the Old Testament are in Daniel 9,
where Jeremiah's prophecy of seventy years (cf. Jer. 24:12ff.)
is reinterpreted to mean "seventy heptads" and to have es-
chatological significance beyond what was initially thought
(cf. esp. vv. 1-3, 20-27), and in Psalm 110, where the Ca-
naanite chieftain Melchizedek of Genesis 14 is brought into
the lineage of Israel as one of the nation's ancient worthies
(cf. v. 4).
More particularly, in the New Testament there is a similar
conjunction of old and new. The earliest pree;-:hing of the
apostles, we are told, was cast almost entirely in personal
terms and functional categories:
"Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by
miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through
him, as you yourselves know. This man was handed over to yo_
by· God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the
help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the
cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the
agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its
hold on him." (Acts 2:22-24)
and the words that Jesus had spoken" (2:17, 22). And in John
12, of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem and the use of Psalm 118:25-26
and Zechariah 9:9 in that connection, we are told: "At first
his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was
glorified did they realize that these things had been written
about him and that they had done these things to him" (12:16).
In these two accounts-one at the beginning of the evange-
list's "Book of Signs" and the other at its close-the disciples
are presented as coming to understand certain actions and
sayings of Jesus in light of the Old Testament only at a later
time-along, of course, the general lines of interpretation laid
out by Jesus, but without any direct word from him.
In fact, each of the four Gospels in its own way evidences
how the canonical evangelists attempted to be both true to
the proclamation which they received and relevaat to the par-
ticular situations which they faced. Each is a recasting of the
original gospel tradition to meet specific issues and concerns
within their respective communities addressed, as the appli-
cation of redaction criticism so abundantly illustrates. Like-
wise, Paul's letters evidence this wedding of old and new in
their pastoral applications of the gospel to various theological
and ethical problems in the churches. One particularly ob-
vious conjunction of what Jesus was known to have taught
and Paul's application of the thrust of that teaching for a some-
what different situation can be found in 1 Corinthians 7. For
in verses 10-11 Paul quotes a saying of Jesus as settling one
matter-"To the married I give this command (net I, but the
Lord)"-while in verses 12ff., with regard to a further matter
on which the church possessed no explicit word ·A Jesus, he
speaks as one authoritatively expressing the gospel's intent:
"To the rest I say this (1, not the Lord)." But this is only one
fairly obvious example. In the following chapters much more
will be said to demonstrate this point for both Paul and the
Gospel writers.
B. CHRISTIAN lliEOLOGY AS A
STORY OF DEVELOPMENT
The history of Christian theology is a story of development.
In the Bible we have the record of God's progressive revelation
22 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
exploration, trade, and the arts, and so began to view all hu-
man endeavor in terms of progress both quantitatively and
qualitatively. 5 More significantly for our purposes, a number
of works were written during the nineteenth century by em-
inent theologians representing all shades of the theological
spectrum advocating a developmental understanding of the
progress of Christian doctrine since the close of the New Tes-
tament canon-with some also arguing for a development of
doctrine within the canon. John Henry Newman's An Essay
on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1845), of course, was
seminal. But just as important were Auguste Sabatier's The
Apostle Paul: A Sketch of the Development of His Doctrine (1870;
ET, 1896), Robert Rainy's The Delivery and Development of
Christian Doctrine (1874), Adolf Harnack's History of Dogma
(1886; ET, 1905), and James Orr's The Progress of Dogma (1901).
Likewise, today the concept of development is very much at
the fore, both in Protestant and Catholic circles and among
both evangelical and liberal scholars.
Yet while almost everyone today is prepared to speak of
the development of Christian doctrine over the past two mil-
lennia, and while many would also speak of development
within the Scriptures themselves (whether under the rubric
of "progressive revelation" or the more mundane "evolution
of religion"), three quite different models of development have
been proposed. 6 First, there are those who take the relation-
ship of later formulations to earlier foundations to be essen-
tially one of identity or sameness, with what appear to be
later innovations only more precise explications and applica-
tions of what was already implicit earlier. The analogy to be
drawn is that of a syllogism, where what appears to be an
innovation in the conclusion is only the logical deduction
drawn from the major and minor premises and is new only
in the sense that it had not been seen to be the case before.
This was the attitude of the Alexandrian Fathers (e.g., Clem-
5 For a helpful treatment of the history of doctrinal development, see
Peter Toon's The Development of Doctrine in the Clturch (Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Eerdmans, 1979).
6 0n these three models, see M. F. Wiles, The Remaking of Christian
Doctrine (London: SCM, 1974), pp. 4-9.
A Developmental Henrleneutic 25
pose for the nation Israel in the divine economy? Can the
Church be open to Jews and Judaism and still maintain its
own uniqueness? What is a proper Christian witness to Jews,
and how can it be carried out? Must so-called Messianic Jews
conform to practices that have developed within the Christian
Church over the centuries, or can faith in Jesus be expressed
through the forms of Judaism? If God has ordained religious
pluralism, how do we as Christians live in such a situation-
particularly with respect to Jews and Judaism?
Likewise, it is only recently that the Church has awakened
to the presence and needs of ethnic minorities. Before the
great missionary outreaches which began only a century ago,
Christians largely existed in rather self-contained national en-
claves, having little contact with people of other cultures and
being unaware of matters having to do with multiculturalism.
Even with the rise of the modem missionary movement, is-
sues pertaining to transculturalism and multiculturalism were
usually left to the missionaries themselves and to the mis-
sionary societies which sent them out. In our day, however,
the situation is entirely different. With the ease of travel, the
worldwide nature of communications, the liberation of en-
slaved peoples, and the migrations of many in search of a
better life, Western Christendom has been confronted by mul-
ticulturalism as never before. Christian theology today can
hardly be written without attention to the plurality of religious
concepts which all this has brought about. Christian ministry
has been compelled to come to terms with what it means to
be Christ's own and to proclaim Christ's gospel in the midst
of such diversity. And Christian ethics has been faced with
the task of thinking through what it means for men and women
of diverse cultures to be made one in Christ and of actualizing
a Christian understanding of oneness in both the Church and
society.
The early Church's doctrine of oneness in Christ cannot
be taken to mean the renunciation of racial characteristics or
ethnic distinctions. Paul, for example, always considered him-
self a Jew-albeit, of course, a fulfilled Jew since his encounter
with the risen Christ. He lived a Jewish lifestyle as a Chris-
tian, and he counseled his converts to express their Christian
faith in accord with the cultural forms with which t£'.ey were
46 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
'Paul uses the noun "freedom" feleutheria) in Rom. 8:21; 1 Cor. 10:29;
2 Cor. 3:17; Gal. 2:4; 5:1, 13 (twice); the adjective "free" (eL-utheros, ape-
leutheros) in Rom. 6:20; 7:3; 1 Cor. 7:21, 22 (twice), 39; 9:1, i.9; 12:13; Gal.
3:28; 4:22, 23, 26, 30, 31; Eph. 6:8; Col. 3:11; and the verb "to free" (e/eu-
theroo) in Rom. 6:18, 22; 8:2, 21; Gal. 5:1. In certain cases the verb "to
redeem" (exagorazo; Gal. 3:13; 4:5) and the noun "the right" (exousia; Rom.
9:21; 1 Cor. 9:4, 5) carry the idea of freedom as well. Elsewhere in the New
Testament the noun "freedom" appears in Jas. 1:25; 2:12; 1 Pet. 2:16, 19; the
adjective "free" in Matt. 17:26; John 8:33, 36; 1 Pet. 2:16; Rev. 6:15; 13:16,
19; and the verb "to free" in John 8:32, 36.
54 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
centre and personal relations." 3 That does not mean that Paul
held only to the status quo with respect to society and its
institutions. Admittedly, at times he almost sounds like he
does, as when he tells the Corinthians, "Each one should re-
tain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to
which God has called him. This is the rule I lay down in all
the churches" (1 Cor. 7:17; cf. vv. 20-21, 24). Yet rather than
defending the status quo, "Paul felt," as Peter Richardson
notes, "that social institutions as institutions did not deserve
first attention. He was interested in relationships, and [be-
lieved that] the effects of the chasm between freeman and
slave could be bridged by the quality of personal and corpo-
rate relationships when both were 'in Christ' ."4
The way in which Paul emphasized relationships and be-
gan to work out the social implications of the gospel in specific
situations can be seen in the "house rules" or "house tables"
(Haustafeln) of Colossians 3:18-4:1 and Ephesians 5:21-6:9.
Paul was not the originator of such ethical compilations. Ear-
lier Greek and Jewish moralists had comparable sets-for ex-
ample, Attalus of Pergamum (as recorded by Polybius, Histories
18.41.8-9) and Philo (De Decalogo 165-167). And they contin-
ued to appear after Paul's day in the writings of Josephus
(Contra Apion 2.199-210) and the Stoic philosophers Epicte-
tus, Diogenes Laertius, and Pseudo-Phocylides. Yet while
comparable in both form and content to other known sets of
house rules, those of Paul in Colossians and Ephesians are
distinguishable from their predecessors and immediate suc-
cessors in two important respects.
In the first place, the motive and the basis for ethical prac-
tice are different in Paul's house rules than in other extant
sets. The advisability for proper action in the Greek house
rules is founded on the premise that it is good for oneself,
thereby bringing one into harmony with an all-embracing
order of the universe. Jewish house rules, of course, rise above
such a rationale and relate ethics to the revealed will of a
beneficent God who desires the protection of the weak and
3 Preiss, "Life in Christ and Social Ethics in the Epistle to Philemon,"
merely legal and the conventional norms. Just what this meant
for Onesimus' own place in society we don't know. Perhaps
he continued as Philemon's slave but worshipped with his
master on an equal basis. Perhaps he was freed by Philemon.
Perhaps, as Edgar J. Goodspeed suggested, he later became
the Bishop of Ephesus referred to by Ignatius in his letter to
the Ephesians (1:1) and so ruled ecclesiastically over Phile-
mon. But whatever his status, we may be reasonably confi-
dent that Onesimus' relations with Philemon and Philemon's
with Onesimus were considerably altered, being put on an
entirely different basis than before-a basis that would ulti-
mately have far-reaching ·consequences for the institution of
slavery itself. Furthermore, evidently because the Church rec-
ognized in Paul's words to Philemon the beginnings of a
Christian social consciousness and the paradigm for future
Christian social action, the Letter to Philemon was preserved
and became part of the New Testament canon.
Messiah and Deliverer had come (d. the use of Isa. 61:1-2a
in Luke 4:16-21), proclaiming a message of freedom (cf. John
8:31-32, 36) and acting in such a way as to effect mankind's
freedom and forgiveness. So they included in their confession
, of oneness in Christ-a confession which, as we have seen,
Paul used in Galatians to support his argument for the equal-
ity ofJews and Gentiles-the phrase "neither slave nor free."
And though they may not have been able to predict all that
this principle of the gospel would effect when put into prac-
tice, they were; in fact, proclaiming a truth pregnant with
societal implications.
It was the apostle Paul who seems to have been most
aware among the early Christians of the societal implications
of "neither slave nor free" in the Church's confession-though,
admittedly, his perception was not anywhere as clear or his
action anywhere as decisive in this area as it was with respect
to the principle "neither Jew nor Greek." But that is not to
minimize Paul's importance on the freedom question. What
he did was to begin to apply this principle of the gospel in
ways that were to revitalize some existing structures of society
and ultimately to bring about the demise of others.
The Church of the second century, as we have seen, seems
to have taken seriously Paul's teaching on the mutual accep-
tance of one another in Christ, regardless of social status. But
it also appears to have gone no further than that in working
out the implications of the gospel's social mandate. With the
Alexandrian Fathers and the theology epitomized in Augus-
tine, however, the Church veered off in other directions with
respect to slavery. It was only as Christians read their Bible
apart from these Alexandrian and Augustinian heritages that
the institution of the enslavement of blacks was effectively
challenged and finally eliminated.
Yet the question of slavery was not entirely settled and
put to rest by William Wilberforce's activities in England and
by America's Civil War. Like a well-rooted willow, which
when cut down at the trunk generates new growth elsewhere
in the area, slavery continues in our day in many forms and
under a variety of guises. It is imperative, therefore, that
Christians constantly be alert and attempt to reapply the gos-
pel's social mandate of "neither slave nor free" wherever such
The Social Mandate 69
4 Cf. J. N. Sevenster, Paul and Seneca (Leiden: Brill, 1961), pp. 192-96.
5 Carlston, "Proverbs, Maxims, and the Historical Jesus," Journal of Bib-
lical Literature, 99 (1980), 95-96.
The Sexual Mandate 73
result of the influence of Gen. 1:27-"he made them male and female"-but
has no effect on the meaning.
76 New Testament Soda I Ethics for Today
tic-type terms in Col. 1:15-20 and the argument against sexual abstinence
in Col. 2:20-23 to propose that "Wives, submit to your husbands, as is
fitting in the Lord" of Col. 3:18 primarily refers to combating certain ascetic
and celibate features of the Colossian heresy.
The Sexual Mandate 87
Thus, as every wife was Eve, the seducer of Adam, she was
to be subordinate and-in-submission to-her--hushand-_- And
--- ---·------------------- -- -
with such a rationale, the theological categories of creation
and curse became dominant over that of redemption.
With Jerome (A.D. 340-420), the theme of_ WPEt~~
temptresses of men became fixed in the Latin church and the
inferior position of women generally became established. Also
through Jerome, whom J. N. D. Kelly calls "the champion of
chastity," 16 virginity and celibacy became elevated to the sta-
tus of a more noble spirituality. The Western text of the Acts
of the Apostles, for example, reflects his influence on the sub-
ject of women in four of its readings: (1) at 1:14, where it adds
"and children" to the reference to "the women" in the upper
room, thereby suggesting that these women were wives of
the apostles and minimizing the independent activity of
16Kelly, Jerome (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), p. 106, n. 10. Jerome's
struggles with his own sexual passions are well known, for he wrote of
them quite freely (cf., e.g., Letters 22.7). In one of his letters he says that he
took up the study of Hebrew because it was more useful than fasting for
the restraining of sexual passion (cf. Letters 125).
The Sexual Mandate 91
"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did
for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'"
(Matt. 25:35-40)
So Christians individually and the Church corporately-
taking also as our motto the words of Isaiah 61:1-2a, in obe-
dience to our Lord's commands, seeking to express the prin-
ciples of the Christian gospel, and in line with the paradigm
set by the earliest believers in Jesus-are called upon to live
out our new life "in Christ" in ways that are both personally
and socially relevant. As was Israel during the time of the Old
Covenant, so the Church of the New Covenant is the primary
social structure for the expression of God's reign. It is the
arena wherein God's reign is to be most fully at work, and it
is the instrument through which God's reign is to be most
adequately expressed to an alien world. It is important as an
instrument for the conversion of individuals. It is also im-
portant as the prototype for that new realm of social existence
which God is calling into being. Its very presence in the world,
like salt and light, has a salutary effect, both in condemning
evil and in drawing people to Christ. But it also, again like
salt and light, is meant to have an outreach and mission to
the world-one that seeks to undercut evil and establish jus-
tice. To change the metaphor somewhat, the Israelites' mis-
sion was to be both centripetal (i.e., directed inward toward
a central axis) and centrifugal (i.e., directed away from a cen-
tral axis), though, sadly, they often emphasized the first to
the exclusion of the second. The Church's mission is likewise
to be both centripetal and centrifugal in nature, and it is ours
as Christians individually and the Church corporately to hold
the two in tandem.
All too often, Christians see redemption in Christ as
something to be actively pursued and passively possessed.
But the Good News proclaimed by the New Testament is that
God redeems freely and bestows new life as a gift-with the
result that becoming new creatures in Christ Jesus by faith,
we are then and there called to a life of active participation
with God by the power of his Spirit in the expression of that
relationship. Faith in Christ is meant to be the basis for a life
of expanded vision, sharpened sensitivities, moral courage,
and active endeavor, not a substitute for thought or change.
Epilogue 97
99
100 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
Niebuhr, H. Richard. Christ and Culture. New York: Harper & Row,
1951.
Niebuhr, Reinhold. An Interpretation of Christian Ethics. New York:
Harper, 1935.
- - - · Moral Man and Immoral Society. New York: Scribner's,
1934.
Nineham, Dennis. The Use and Abuse of the Bible: The Study of the
Bible in an Age of Rapid Cultural Change. London: Macmillan,
1976.
Ramsey, Paul. "The Biblical Norm of Righteousness." Interpretation,
24 (1970), 419-29.
Sanders, Jack T. Ethics in the New Testament: Change and Development.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.
Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Moral Teaching of the New Testament.
Trans. J. Holland-Smith and W. ). O'Hara. New York: Herder
& Herder, 1965.
Sittler, Joseph. The Structure of Christian Ethics. Baton Rouge: Lou-
isiana State University Press, 1958.
C. ON A DEVELOPMENT HERMENEUTIC (for Chapter II):
Brown, Raymond E. The "Sensus Plenior" of Holy Scripture. Baltimore:
St. Mary's University, 1955.
Chadwick, Owen. From Bousset to Newman: The Idea of Doctrinal
Development. London: Cambridge University Press, 1957.
Dunn, James G. Unity and Diversity in the New Testament. London:
SCM, 1977.
Geiselmann, J. R. Die katholische Tubinger Schule. Ihre theologische
Eigenart. Freiburg: Herder, 1964.
Harnack, Adolf. Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte. Freiburg: Mohr, 1886
(one-volume abridgement: Outlines of the History of Dogma. Trans.
E. K. Mitchell. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1893).
Lonergan, Bernard J. F. Method in Theology. New York: Herder &
Herder, 1972.
Longenecker, Richard N. Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period. Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1975.
- - - · "The Obedience of Christ in the Theology of the Early
Church." In Reconciliation and Hope (Leon L. Morris Festschrift).
Ed. R. Banks. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1974, pp. 142-52.
- - - . "On the Concept of Development in Pauline Thought." In
Perspectives on Evangelical Theology. Ed. K. S. Kantzer and S. N.
Gundry. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1979, pp. 195-207.
Marshall, I. Howard. " 'Early Catholicism' in the New Testament."
In New Dimensions in New Testament Study. Ed. R. N. Longe-
necker and M. C. Tenney. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan,
1974, pp. 217-31.
102 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
Davies, Alan T. Anti-Semitism and the Christian Mind. New York: Her-
der & Herder, 1969.
- - - - , ed. Anti-Semitism and the Foundations of Christianity. New
York: Paulist Press, 1979.
Davies, W. D. "Paul and the People of Israel." New Testament Studies,
24 (1977), 4-39.
DeLange, N. R. M. Origen and the Jews: Studies in Jewish-Christian
Relations in Third-Century Palestine. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1976.
Grant, Frederick C. Ancient Judaism and the New Testament. New York:
Macmillan, 1959.
Isaac, Jules. Genese de l'antisemitisme. Paris: Calm1nn-Levy, 1956.
---·Jesus and Israel. Trans. S. Gran. New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston, 1971.
Jocz, Jakob. The Jewish People and Jesus Christ. London: S.P.C.K.,
1949.
- - - . The Jewish People and Jesus Christ After Auschwitz: A Study
in the Controversy Between Church and Synagogue. Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Baker, 1981.
Katz, Jacob. Exclusiveness and Tolerance: Studies in Jewish-Gentile Re-
lations in Medieval and Modern Times. London: Oxford University
Press, 1961.
Parkes, James. The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue. London:
Soncino, 1934.
- - - . A History of the Jewish People. London: Weidenfeld and
Nicolson, 1962.
- - - . Jesus, Paul, and the Jews. London: SCM, 1936.
- - - - . Judaism and Christianity. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1948.
---.Prelude to Dialogue: Jewish-Christian Relationships. New York:
Schocken, 1969.
Richardson, Peter. Israel in the Apostolic Church. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1969.
- - - · Paul's Ethic of Freedom. Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
1979.
Ruether, Rosemary R. Faith and Fratricide: The 1heological Roots of
Anti-Semitism. New York: Seabury Press, 197
Sandmel, Samuel. Anti-Semitism in the New Testament? Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1978.
Schoeps, Hans J. The Jewish-Christian Agreement: A History of Theol-
ogies in Conflict. Trans. D. E. Green. London: Faber & Faber,
1963.
104 New Testament Social Ethics for Today
Jewett, Paul King. Man as Male and Female. Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Eerdmans, 1975.
---·The Ordination of Women. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans,
1980.
Knight, George W., III. The New Testament Teaching on the Role Re-
lationships of Men and Women. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1977.
Lefkowitz, Mary R., and Maureen B. Pant. Women in Greece and Rome.
Toronto: Samuel-Stevens, 1977.
Leipoldt, J. Die Frau in der antiken Welt und im Urchristentum. Leipzig:
Koehler & Amelang, 1955.
Loewe, Raphael. The Position of Women in Judaism. London: S.P.C.K.,
1966.
Meeks, Wayne A. "The Image of the Androgyne: Some Uses of a
Symbol in Earliest Christinity." History of Religions, 13 (1974),
165-208.
Mollenkott, Virginia Ramey. Women, Men and the Bible. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1977.
Neusner, Jacob. "Women in the System of Mishnah." Conservative
Judaism, 33 (1980), 3-13.
Pape, Dorothy. God and Women: A Fresh Look at What the New Tes-
tament Says about Women. Oxford: Mowbrays, 1978.
Richardson, Peter. Paul's Ethic of Freedom. Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1979.
Ruether, Rosemary R., and Eleanor McLaughlin, ed. Women of Spirit:
Female Leadership in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. New York:
Simon & Schuster, 1979.
Scroggs, Robin. "Paul and the Eschatological Woman." Journal of the
American Academy of Religion, 40 (1972), 283-303.
Seltman, Charles T. Women in Antiquity. New York: Collier, 1962.
Stendahl, Krister. The Bible and the Role of Women. Trans. E. T. Sander.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966.
Swidler, Leonard. Women in Judaism: The Status of Women in Formative
Judaism. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1976.
Tavard, George H. Women in Christian Tradition. Notre Dame, Ind.:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1973.
Tetlow, Elizabeth M. Women and Ministry in the New Testament. New
York: Paulist Press, 1980.
Williams, D. The Apostle Paul and Women in the Church. Van Nuys,
Calif.: BIM Pub., 1977.