Standaard Boekhandel gebruikt cookies en gelijkaardige technologieën om de website goed te laten werken en je een betere surfervaring te bezorgen.
Hieronder kan je kiezen welke cookies je wilt inschakelen:
Technische en functionele cookies
Deze cookies zijn essentieel om de website goed te laten functioneren, en laten je toe om bijvoorbeeld in te loggen. Je kan deze cookies niet uitschakelen.
Analytische cookies
Deze cookies verzamelen anonieme informatie over het gebruik van onze website. Op die manier kunnen we de website beter afstemmen op de behoeften van de gebruikers.
Marketingcookies
Deze cookies delen je gedrag op onze website met externe partijen, zodat je op externe platformen relevantere advertenties van Standaard Boekhandel te zien krijgt.
Je kan maximaal 250 producten tegelijk aan je winkelmandje toevoegen. Verwijdere enkele producten uit je winkelmandje, of splits je bestelling op in meerdere bestellingen.
Thomas R. Blanton, IV seeks to reconstruct the social contexts in which two discourses that involve the new covenant were written, and to which they responded. He first examines the Damascus Document from among the Dead Sea scrolls, arguing that this discourse was crafted in order to delegitimate Hasmonean claims to the high priesthood and Pharisaic claims to authority in legal interpretation. In response to the claims and practices advocated by these rival groups, the Essene sect crafted a discourse which construed the new covenant as one that supported Essene claims that they were the legitimate bearers of high priestly authority and the divinely authorized interpreters of the Torah. In the second half of the book, the author argues that Paul crafted his discourse on the new covenant in opposition to an ideology that was espoused by a rival group of missionaries, according to which, under the conditions of the new covenant, the spirit of God was thought to empower individuals to follow the Torah with perfect obedience. Paul crafted his own discourse in opposition to this view, positing that law and spirit were antithetical terms. By arguing in this way, he attempted to bolster the credibility of his own law-free message.