Airton José da Silva - Aula inaugural no CEARP, Brodowski, em 01.02.2010airtonjo

Meu nome é Airton José da Silva. Nasci em Patos de Minas, MG, Brasil. Estudos de Teologia e de Bíblia na Gregoriana e no Bíblico de Roma, Itália. Mestre em Teologia Bíblica. Professor de Bíblia Hebraica / Antigo Testamento na Faculdade de Teologia da Arquidiocese de Ribeirão Preto, SP, desde 1979. Fui professor na mesma área na FTCR da PUC-Campinas de 1980 a 2006.

Mito como narrativa e metáfora na Bíblia Hebraica

Por

O artigo

Myth as Story and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible

By Paul K.-K. Cho – The Bible and Interpretation: June 2019

I. Introduction

Allow me to begin with a bold claim that I can only begin to defend in this blog: Myth constitutes a vital part of the Hebrew Bible; it powerfully shapes the contours of biblical language, its various narratives, and theologies. That is, myth deeply defines what we might call the biblical world – populates the landscape with mythic monsters and deities and animates that world in which the God of Israel rises against forces of evil and, through victorious battle, creates order, erects his temple, and establishes his kingship.

Some readers will find the above claim objectionable. For example, some may argue that the Hebrew Bible is itself polemical against myth and instead espouses monotheism and a historical conception of reality. Yhwh, the God of Israel, the argument might go, says, “I am the First, and I am the Last; there is no god but me” (Isa 44:6). If there is but one God according to the Hebrew Bible, how can it contain myths with their many gods? And Yhwh delivers Israel in historical time, out of slavery, out of Egypt. If God acts in history, what need is there for myth?

Yet, we find fragments of myth throughout the pages of the Hebrew Bible, interwoven into genuine memories of the past, faithful representations of the present, and sincere hopes for the future. What more? Careful study reveals that myth shapes the biblical view of history in toto and thus the very reality in and through and toward which biblical writers lived. That is, we find that myth in the Hebrew Bible has not only to do with expression but also with being. Myth, it can be argued, constitutes a vital, even a foundational, part of the Hebrew Bible and the biblical world.

(…)

VII. Conclusion

That fragments of myth can be found in the Hebrew Bible is clear to anyone who has read it. That these fragments in fact give shape to the narrative plot of pivotal moments in the Hebrew Bible may come as a surprise to some. What more, we have only begun to understand the ways in which myth animates the biblical vision of the world – the foundational events of creation and exodus and the ongoing hope for redemption out of the conditions of exile and the cataclysm of the eschaton.

O livro

CHO, P. K.-K. Myth, History, and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019, 259 p. – ISBN 9781108476195

This book examines the long-debated issue of the relationship between the Hebrew Bible and ancient Near Eastern myths. Using an innovative, interdisciplinary CHO, P. K.-K. Myth, History, and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019methodology that combines theories of metaphor and narrative, Paul Cho argues that the Hebrew Bible is more deeply mythological than previously recognized. Because the Hebrew Bible contains fragments of the sea myth but no continuous narrative, the study of myth in the Hebrew Bible is usually circumscribed to the level of motifs and themes. Cho challenges this practice and demonstrates that the Hebrew Bible contains shorter and longer compositions studded with imagery that are structured by the plot of sea myths. Through close analysis of key Near Eastern myths and biblical texts, Cho shows that myth had a more fundamental influence on the plot structure and conceptual framework of the Hebrew Bible than has been recognized.

Paul K.-K. Cho is an assistant professor of Hebrew Bible at Wesley Theological Seminary, Washington, DC. His interests center on the interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, with emphasis on its literary texture and modes of producing meaning, particularly as they relate to the innovation and creation of worldviews and theologies.

Os textos bíblicos e a cosmologia antiga

Por

The Structure of Heaven and Earth: How Ancient Cosmology Shaped Everyone’s Theology

The Bible is often difficult to make sense of without the proper conceptual framework. Why is Paul concerned about mysterious angels, principles, powers, forces, and archons in his epistles? Why are interactions with demons at the forefront of Jesus’ ministry in Mark? Why is heaven sometimes described as having different levels? Why does Paul describe people under the law as being enslaved to the elements? What motivated early Christians to worship a heavenly saviour? It’s hard to answer these questions without a detailed understanding of ancient Jewish and Greek cosmology, so I’ve spent a great deal of time reading the best books I can find on the subject. Much of what I learned surprised me; perhaps it will surprise you too.

É muito difícil entender a Bíblia sem a estrutura conceitual adequada.

Por que Paulo está preocupado com anjos misteriosos, principados, potestades, forças e arcontes em suas epístolas? Por que as interações com os demônios estão sempre presentes no ministério de Jesus em Marcos? Por que o céu às vezes é descrito como tendo níveis diferentes? Por que Paulo descreve as pessoas sob a lei como escravizadas pelos elementos? O que motivou os primeiros cristãos a adorar um salvador celestial?

É difícil responder a essas perguntas sem uma compreensão adequada da cosmologia judaica e grega antiga, por isso gastei um tempo lendo os melhores livros que encontrei sobre o assunto. Muito do que aprendi me surpreendeu, talvez também o surpreenda.

Fonte: Paul D. – Is That in the Bible? – 17 August, 2019

O Romance de Alexandre: história e literatura

| Por

O Romance de Alexandre é um relato da vida e das façanhas de Alexandre Magno. Embora construído em torno de um núcleo histórico, o romance é em grande parte obra de ficção. Foi amplamente copiado e traduzido, acumulando lendas e elementos fantásticos em diferentes estágios. A versão original foi composta em grego antes de 338 d.C., quando foi feita uma tradução para o latim. Vários manuscritos tardios atribuem o trabalho ao historiador oficial da expedição de Alexandre, Calístenes, sobrinho de Aristóteles, mas ele morreu antes de Alexandre e não poderia ter escrito um relato completo de sua vida. O autor desconhecido é apelidado de Pseudo-Calístenes.

Entre os séculos IV e XVI, o Romance de Alexandre foi traduzido em copta, guez, grego bizantino, árabe, persa, armênio, siríaco, hebraico e na maioria das línguas europeias. Devido à grande variedade de obras distintas derivadas do romance grego original, o “romance de Alexandre” às ​​vezes é tratado como um gênero literário e não como uma obra única.

O Romance de Alexandre é um texto difícil de definir e avaliar com justiça. Desde seus primeiros dias foi um texto aberto, adaptado em uma variedade de culturas com significados que variam, mas que ainda parecem carregar uma forte corrente de homogeneidade: Alexandre é o herói que não pode se tornar um deus e que carrega consigo os desejos e esforços das culturas hospedeiras.

 

STONEMAN, R. ; NAWOTKA, K. ; WOJCIECHOWSKA, A. (ed.) The Alexander Romance: History and Literature. Gröningen: Barkhuis & Gröningen University Library, 2018, XV + 322 p. – ISBN 9789492444714

The Alexander Romance is a difficult text to define and to assess justly. From its earliest days it was an open text, which was adapted into a variety of cultures with STONEMAN, R. ; NAWOTKA, K. ; WOJCIECHOWSKA, A. (ed.) The Alexander Romance: History and Literature. Gröningen: Barkhuis & Gröningen University Library, 2018meanings that themselves vary, and yet seem to carry a strong undercurrent of homogeneity: Alexander is the hero who cannot become a god, and who encapsulates the desires and strivings of the host cultures.

The papers assembled in this volume, which were originally presented at a conference at the University of Wroclaw, Poland, in October 2015, all face the challenge of defining the Alexander Romance. Some focus on quite specific topics while others address more overarching themes. They form a cohesive set of approaches to the delicate positioning of the text between history and literature. From its earliest elements in Hellenistic Egypt, to its latest reworkings in the Byzantine and Islamic Middle East, the Alexander Romance shows itself to be a work that steadily engages with such questions as kingship, the limits of human (and Greek) nature, and the purpose of history. The Romance began as a history, but only by becoming literature could it achieve such a deep penetration of east and west.

 

Resenha na Bryn Mawr Classical Review em 10.08.2019 por Chiara Di Serio, Università di Roma ‘La Sapienza’

This recent publication, edited by R. Stoneman, K. Nawotka and A. Wojciechowska, contains contributions dealing with several questions connected to a historiographic or literary interpretation of the Alexander Romance .

R. Stoneman’s remarkable competence on the Alexander Romance and the texts connected to it (as evidenced by his high-value monographies and articles), guarantees the quality of the contributions presented here.

Stoneman’s introduction explains very clearly that the problems connected to the use of the Romance as a source arise from its complex relationship to history and to literature. The Alexander Romance is difficult to classify with respect to genre: “it has elements of history, of biography, and of novel” (p. vii). In order to define the AR Stoneman borrows from David Konstan the expression “open text” (1). The AR raises the question whether an open text can be seen as a historical source. Stoneman also addresses the problem of the dating of the text, which according to him belongs to the 3rd century B.C.

The most significant segment in the introduction is devoted to the definition of the AR as “history”. Here Stoneman declares he shares the idea expressed by the philosopher Hayden White: “in creating ourselves, we create our past” (p. viii). Narration is a fundamental category that encompasses all that is written about the past and transforms the present into a completion of the past from which we wish to descend. Narrated history is therefore a mimesis of real history (2). These observations about the narration of historical facts and characters are very interesting because it is not only in the classical world that this type of narration often includes “mythical” elements that distance them from our positivistic and rational idea of history as the description of true events.

Later, Stoneman applies his considerations about the meaning of history to its use in the AR. He reminds that especially Thucydides maintained that events should be reported the way they actually happened. Lucianus also believed that history does not admit lies. In this way, though, history becomes a “transcendental matter”. But few historians followed Thucydides and neither lied nor changed some details, says Stoneman. Therefore, in Stoneman’s perspective, interpretation is inevitable.

He believes history can be conceived in another way, by attributing a “plot” to historiographic narrations. Biographies in particular, he writes, are a way to re-create past experience. Such narrations develop both through space and time and this applies also to the reconstruction of the meaning of Alexander’s career. But such meaning can vary depending on those who read or use Alexander the Great’s stories in different ages and circumstances. The “true” Alexander becomes irrelevant in light of the different meanings that were attributed to him.

An important matter that this volume does not address is that of the many letters (especially those between Alexander and Darius) mentioned in the AR. Stoneman believes that letters are fictional markers in ancient literature. The AR letters help to give the text the impression of truth. But given its heterogeneous style it is not possible to see a pattern in their inclusion in the text. It mould be useful to investigate further the use of such documents in historical narrative.

In conclusion Stoneman states that the AR’s “open text” originates as a historical narration but then acquires a “mythical” configuration as a literary work (p. xii), and as such it had a large influence both in both East and West (p. iv).

Stoneman ends his introduction by summarizing the main ideas contained in the essays that make up the volume. Abstracts of the individual contributions also appear at the end of the work. What follows below is a synthesis of their main points.

The first section is devoted to the definition of the AR as literature. I. Ladynin examines the passages in which Alexander is equated to the Egyptian king Sesonchosis. According to the author, this could be Egyptian propaganda exalting Egypt’s past as world leader. This past was revived with Alexander when he became Egypt’s legitimate sovereign, thanks to his creation of a new world empire. Traces of this fictional propaganda can be found in the texts by Dicaearchus of Messene and Pompeius Trogus.

Y. Trnka-Amrhein considers two texts, The Sesonchosis Novel and The Ninus Novel, as narrations deriving from the AR. She believes they show similar narrative patterns, especially as to their content. They deal with Eastern sovereigns, including Semiramis, whose stories can be compared with that of Alexander.

In his own essay R. Stoneman provides a definition of “wonder” that explains the AR’s position within Greek paradoxography. According to the author, wonders are presented in a natural way and provide the sources for later philosophical narrations. The AR is an “innocent text” that only narrates and does not interpret.

H. Manteghi examines the Life of Apollonius by Philostratus, who imagined his character’s journey as a repetition of Alexander’s itinerary towards the Eastern borders. Her analysis continues with the Persian version of the poem Iskandarnāma by Nizāmi that tells of a journey made by Alexander accompanied by Apollonius himself (Balinās). The author postulates that Nizāmi could have mistaken Alexander pupil of a pupil of Apollonius of Tyana with its more famous namesake. Moreover, Lucian’s dialogue Alexander sive Pseudomantis had probably collected several stories about the magician Apollonius circulating in Syria and in Asia Minor. In addition, Manteghi mention hermetical works as source of Nizāmi’s poem, in which Apollonius is a contemporary of Alexander. Manteghi further speculates about the existence of popular stories on Apollonius’ magical feats, as those mentioned by John Tzetzes, which were applied to Nizāmi’s narrative. Finally, an important role might be attributed to a Zoroastrian tradition on Nizāmi’s tales originating in Azerbaijan, where that culture was spread.

D. Selden’s study sets out from the observation that Indian literature shows only feeble traces of Alexander’s invasion of Punjāb, while classical historians deal extensively with it. These tales build a coherent picture that reveals the features of a “mythologie blanche” (according to an expression used by J. Derrida, see p. 82), where several episodes of a pseudo- philosophical nature are inserted. The Indian narrations of the Sassanide period reveal, if compared with the Greek ones, the point of view from which the classical Greek tradition reports those episodes. Selden then dwells on the description of Poros, provided by Diodorus Siculus, that represents an Indian double of Alexander and evokes a complementary image of the king, placed in a circumscribed world that differs from Greek culture.

The second section of the volume is devoted to the “bad” historical exposition of the AR. G. Oliver tries to analyse the AR from a political and economic point of view. He examines the context of the Liber de Morte that contains a will by Alexander in which he names the Rhodians as his executors. Oliver doubts whether this document dates to the late 4th century.

B. Garstad’s article focuses on what is apparently a gross mistake in the account of Alexander’s march from Italy to Carthage and Egypt in the AR, one that betrays a Roman point of view in its presentation of the relations between Alexander and the Romans. Up to the invasion of Persia from Egypt, Alexander seems concerned to defend his realm and collect his armies. Then he marches on, apparently to support Egypt’s relationship to the Greco-Roman world. The AR creates a sort of association between Greece, Rome and Egypt against their common Eastern enemies.

K. Nawotka believes that the author of the AR considered his work a historical treatise. He analyses the account of the battle of Gaugamela, which contains historical elements, although it is largely fictitious. The material used in the account comes from previous Greek works, but most of all from an Iranian account of the crossing of the river Stranga. The author of the AR uses several traditions, selecting from them in order to create the ideal image of a king. Moreover, he emphasises his erudition and originality compared to his sources.

H. Wulfram’s study focuses on the work of the translator Julius Valerius and the homogeneity of its style. He analyses Alexandria’s foundation pointing out the many thematic parallels with Virgil’s’ work. He believes that there is an “intertextuality of the second degree” in Julius Valerius’ s translation.

H. Baynham deals with the episode of Alexander’s death in the Metz Epitome that tells the story of how he crawls on hands and knees toward the Euphrates with the intention of diving into it and disappearing. She remarks that this peculiar detail is absent from Alexander’s historiography, except for Arrian. She compares other parallel accounts of the apotheosis of historical characters—Heracles, for instance, or Roman emperors. I believe that these last observations are very valuable for the definition of Alexander as a heroic figure, which we need to take into account when we consider the construction of his image from a historical point of view.

The third section of the volume deals with the influence of the AR. C. T. Djurslev’s essay examines the sources that precede the Armenian version of the AR, where the episode of Alexander’s gates against the assault of Gog and Magog can be found. He demonstrates that the apocalyptic significance of this episode was absent from its early versions where such “gates” stood for the borders of safe, known and “civilized” lands. In order to support his idea, the author analyses some passages from De excidio urbis Hierosolymitanae.

A. Klęczar investigates the Jewish texts that present Alexander in relation to wise men. She refers particularly to the treatise of the Tamid with the episodes of the meeting with the elder in Negev, the journey to the land of darkness, Alexander’s meeting with the Amazons and the scene of his arrival at the gates of Paradise. All this supports the image of Alexander as a universal sovereign.

C. Jouanno focuses on the use of the AR by the Byzantine chronicles. She comes to the conclusion that while the influence of the tales of Pseudo-Callisthenes on the chronographic tradition was common in medieval Europe, the opposite trend is quite rare. Her essay ends with a useful appendix containing an analytical table of the borrowings from Pseudo- Callisthenes in Byzantine chronographies.

The volume ends with E. Cottrell’s article on the circulation of the AR in medieval Islam and its reception in the Persian language. The intellectual activity of the Buyids shows the influence of this tale and of the Pseudo-Aristotelian Epistolary Novel. She examines in particular the Florilegium (Ṣiwān al-ḥikima) remarking its characterization of Alexander as pious sovereign. The author concludes that the Arab Alexander is even more monotheistic than in the Syrian versions, but that also the γ version of the Pseudo-Callisthenes presents Alexander as such. Finally, she observes that the role of the Buyid court in the transmission Greek philosophy and literature was important, and favoured the renaissance of Alexander’s figure.

One of the merits of this volume is the variety of the contributions showing how the “narrative discourses” of the AR – to use an expression of H. White – create the image of the past, or rather “found” what we like to call history.

 

Authors and titles

Richard Stoneman, Introduction: on using literature for history

I Defining the Alexander Romance as literature
Ivan Ladynin, Alexander – ‘the new Sesonchosis’: an early Hellenistic propagandist fiction and its possible background
Yvona Trnka-Amrhein, The fantastic four: Alexander, Sesonchosis, Ninus and Semiramis
Richard Stoneman, The Alexander Romance and the rise of paradoxography
Haila Manteghi, The king and the wizard: Apollonius of Tyana in the Iskandarnāma of Nizāmi Ganjavi (1141–1209)
Daniel Selden, Alexander in the Indies

II How to read ‘bad’ history
Graham Oliver, The Alexander Romance and the Hellenistic political economy
Benjamin Garstad, Alexander’s circuit of the Mediterranean in the Alexander Romance
Krzysztof Nawotka, History into literature in the account of the Campaign of Gaugamela in the Alexander Romance
Hartmut Wulfram, Intertextuality through translation: the foundation of Alexandria and Virgil in Julius Valerius’ Alexander Romance
Elizabeth Baynham, “Joining the gods”: Alexander at the Euphrates; Arrian 7.27.3, Metz Epitome 101-102 and the Alexander Romance

III Related texts: the impact of the Alexander Romance
Christian Thrue Djurslev, Revisiting Alexander’s gates against ‘Gog and Magog’: observations on the testimonies before the Alexander Romance tradition
Aleksandra Klęczar, The universal rule of Alexander in Tamid 32: an overview
Corinne Jouanno, Alexander Romance and Byzantine world chronicles: history cross-fertilized by fiction and the reverse
Emily Cottrell, Alexander at the Buyid Court

 

Notes:
1. D. Konstan, The Alexander Romance: the Cunning of the Open Text, in «Lexis» 16 (1998), pp. 123-138.
2. H. White, The Content of the Form. Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation, Baltimore 1987, e. g. 27, 29.

Leia Mais:
Text and English translation of the Greek Alexander Romance

As origens da devoção a Jesus

Por

Larry W. Hurtado escreve, em 23 de agosto de 2019, em seu blog, sobre as origens da devoção a Jesus nos primórdios do cristianismo. Um tema no qual ele é especialista.

The Origins of Devotion to Jesus in its Ancient Context

(Several months ago, I was asked to write a contribution to a multi-author work on Jesus to be published in French, my contribution to deal with the origins of Jesus-devotion. I was given a word-limit, and so had to be brief. The result is something of a capsulized treatment of the matter. I post below the English version, which will be translated for the French publication. As will be clear from this posting, I’m still around and actually feeling better than expected, at least for now.)

Reverencing Jesus in prayers, hymns, and other devotional actions may be so familiar a part of Christian life and worship that we may not realize how much it was an innovation in the historical setting in which it first appeared. To be sure, in the larger Roman religious environment of the early first century A.D. there were many deities and divinized human figures, all of whom received worship of various types in the general populace. But the Jesus-movement (which became “Christianity”) emerged in the more specific setting of ancient Jewish tradition, in which the exclusivity of the one biblical deity was of paramount concern. In Jewish practice, public worship, including especially sacrifice, was to be restricted solely to the God of Israel, and it was considered idolatry to worship any other figure. The many gods and deified heroes of the larger Roman world were regarded in Jewish tradition as false and blasphemous. In this context, the inclusion of Jesus in the worship practices of the early circles of the Jesus-movement was a remarkable and, indeed, unique development.

This gave earliest Christian devotion a distinctive “dyadic” shape, with God and Jesus both featuring centrally in beliefs and worship. Over against the polytheistic patternHURTADO, L. W. Senhor Jesus Cristo. Devoção a Jesus Cristianismo Primitivo. São Paulo: Paulus/Academia Cristã, 2012, 936 p. - ISBN 9788598481494 of the larger pagan world, early Christian teaching advocated an exclusivity, with solely one God, and this same exclusivity applied to the one Lord Jesus. In the context of ancient Jewish tradition, the duality in early Christian beliefs and devotional practice was also distinctive. The duality did not comprise a di-theism of two deities, however. Instead, Jesus was reverenced in his relationship to God “the Father,” as the unique Son of God, the Image of God, and Word of God, who had been exalted by God to be Lord of all creation.

It is also important to note that this development happened quite early and quickly, and was more like a volcanic explosion than an incremental process. Already, in the earliest Christian texts, the undisputed letters of the Apostle Paul, we see reflected a body of christological claims and beliefs, and a pattern of devotional practices that are more taken for granted than explained. This indicates that by the time of these letters (from ca. 50 A.D. and thereafter) all these phenomena were familiar features of the religious life of circles of the Jesus-movement, both in the various diaspora cities where Paul founded his congregations and also in the Jewish homeland. So, for example, in these letters Paul refers to Jesus as God’s unique “Son,” indicating a distinctively close relationship of Jesus with God (e.g., Galatians 2:20; Romans 1:4, 9; 8:32. He also still more frequently refers to Jesus as “Christ” (= Messiah), indicating Jesus’ role and status as the agent of divine redemption (among many examples, Romans 1:1, 8, 21. Moreover, some two-hundred times Paul refers to Jesus as “the Lord” (Greek: Kyrios) who has been exalted to supremacy over all things by God (e.g., Philippians 2:9-11). In these texts, for believers in particular, the exalted Jesus is their Lord to whom they owe obedience and reverence.

Moreover, Paul’s letters also reflect the understanding of Jesus’ crucifixion as part of the divine plan of redemption, and foretold in the Old Testament scriptures (e.g. Romans 3:21-26; 4:24-25; 1 Corinthians 15:1-7). Already by the time of these Pauline letters, believers had been searching their scriptures and discovering foreshadowings of Jesus in them. As well, Paul’s letters show the belief that Jesus had been designated from before creation, and, indeed, had been “pre-existent” and was the agent through whom all things were created (e.g., 1 Corinthians 8:4-6).

In addition to these titles and christological claims, Paul’s letters also reflect a developed devotional practice in which Jesus was integral and central. This included, for example, the invocation and ritual confession of Jesus in early Christian circles. We see this reflected in Paul’s reference to the confession “Jesus is Lord” and to the ritual invocation of Jesus: “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:9-13). In this statement we have a biblical expression (“call upon the name of the Lord”) that originally referred to the invocation and worship of God, adapted here to designate the invocation of Jesus (e.g., Genesis 13:4; 21:23; Psalm 116:4, 13). Indeed, Paul refers to believers simply as “all those in every location who call on the name of our Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 1:2), and this ritual acclamation of Jesus as Lord is also reflected in 1 Corinthians 12:3. Note also Acts 2:21. Moreover, Paul also refers to this invocation or acclamation of Jesus in an Aramaic expression in the concluding lines of his letter to the Corinthian church (1 Corinthians 16:22). The expression used here, “Marana tha,” (“Our Lord, come!”), reflects the ritual appeal to the risen Jesus as “Lord” in circles of Aramaic-speaking Jewish believers as well as his own Greek-speaking churches. Paul does not translate the Aramaic expression here, probably because he had conveyed it to the Corinthians earlier in his time with them. Similarly, in other texts Paul refers to the practice of addressing God prayerfully in the Aramaic expression “Abba” (“Father,” Galatians 4:6; Romans 8:15). Paul apparently used these two Aramaic expressions and practices, one addressing God as “Father” and one addressing Jesus as “Our Lord,” to give verbal links between his Greek-speaking converts and the devotional practices of their Aramaic-speaking brothers and sisters.

To cite other devotional practices, the early Christian initiation rite, baptism, was from the first distinguished from other water rituals such as the baptism of John the Baptizer by being done “in Jesus’ name” (e.g., Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5). This likely meant that those who were baptized called upon Jesus by name as part of the ritual, and were thereby marked as belonging to him. Unlike many other water rituals, early Christian baptism was a one-time rite of initiation into Christian fellowship, which was identified specifically with reference to Jesus.

Early Christian circles also typically had a shared meal as part of their gatherings. In a text where Paul addresses some problems about this meal in the Corinthian congregation, he refers to it as “the Lord’s supper,” and connects it specifically with Jesus’ redemptive death and his future return (1 Corinthians 11:17-34, especially v. 20). He also likens this corporate meal that honors Jesus to the sacrificial meals in honor of pagan deities, the cup and bread of the Christian meal comprising a sharing (koinōnia) in the blood and body of Christ. As a further indication of the strong liturgical meaning of the Christian meal, he demands an exclusivity of believers, who are to desist from all such pagan rites and participate only in “the table of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 10:14-22).

In other early Christian texts, we have references to ritual healings and exorcisms done “in the name of Jesus,” which likely means that they too involved calling upon the risen Jesus to effect these deeds (e.g., Acts 3:6; 16:18). As noted already, the Gospels portray Jesus as himself a healer and exorcist, and the early Christian healing and in one sense exorcism practices are a continuation of his ministry. But, whereas the Gospels accounts have Jesus healing and exorcising without invoking any other name or power, the early Christian practice of invoking Jesus by name means that his name and power were regarded as the power by which they were able to perform these acts.

As further reflection of the high and central place of Jesus in the early Christian circles, notice the dyadic formula of greeting in Paul’s letters, “grace and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2). Similarly, he refers to “the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 1:1). These formulae link God and Jesus uniquely as the sources of grace and the basis of the churches. Paul’s letters also typically conclude with a benediction from Christ, as in 1 Thessalonians: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you” (1 Thessalonians 5:28, with slight variations also in Philippians 4:23; Galatians 6:18; 1 Corinthians 16:23; Romans 16:20, and there is also the triadic benediction in 2 Corinthians 13:10). These expressions at the beginning and ending of his letters are now commonly thought to be Paul’s use of phrases that originated in group worship settings, and Paul appears to have used them to fit his letters for reading in the churches to which the letters were sent. On this basis, these expressions also give us glimpses of how Jesus was included with God in liturgical practices of greeting and blessing in early Christian circles.

Indeed, Paul’s letters also reflect the practice of including Jesus in prayer-appeals as co-recipient with God, as in 1 Thessalonians, “Now may our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus direct our way to you.” And Paul continues with a prayer-wish that “the Lord” (Jesus) may cause the Thessalonian believers to increase in love and be strengthened in holiness (1 Thessalonians 3:11-13). In another letter, Paul refers to his own repeated prayer-appeals directly to Jesus to remove an affliction (2 Corinthians 12:8). In still another context, where he directs the Corinthian church to discipline an erring believer, Paul refers to pronouncing judgment “in the name of the Lord Jesus,” and to acting “with the power of our Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:3-5). This apparently involved a ritual expulsion of the offender from the church, but the point here is that the authority and power of the ritual is ascribed to the risen Jesus.

In all of these beliefs and devotional practices (and still others) the risen and exalted Jesus is central, and is joined with God as unique focus of faith and co-recipient of reverence. Note, for example, how Acts refers to the church in Antioch “worshipping the Lord” (Jesus), who is then depicted as speaking through Christian prophets, directing that Paul and Barnabas should be commissioned for the ensuing mission-travels related in the ensuing chapters (Acts 13:2-3). In a vision-scene, the book of Revelation portrays heavenly worship of God (“he who sits on the throne”) and the risen Jesus (“the lamb”) jointly, which likely reflects the sort of dyadic worship pattern long familiar to the author (Revelation 5:9-14). To underscore the chronological point here, this body of beliefs and practices clearly emerged and became familiar features of circles of believers within the scarcely two decades between Jesus’ crucifixion and the earliest of Paul’s letters.

Indeed, we should probably judge that this remarkable development emerged within the very earliest years, perhaps more accurately within the earliest months, after Jesus’ death, ca. 30 A.D. For prior to the experience that produced his profound religious re-orientation, Paul (then a zealous Pharisee) was a determined opponent of the young Jesus-movement seeking, in his own words, to “destroy” it (Galatians 1:13-16; Philippians 3:4-6). Paul refers to the “Damascus road” experience that produced his remarkable change in his religious stance as a “revelation” of Jesus as rightfully God’s unique Son (Galatians 1:16). This suggests that the core content of the experience was a radical revision of his view of Jesus in particular, whom Paul may initially have regarded as a false teacher and perhaps even as accursed by God. Now Paul’s revelatory experience is commonly dated within one to two years after Jesus’ crucifixion. So, already at that point, in the earliest years after Jesus’ crucifixion, this young Pharisee, who professes to have been exceptionally zealous for his ancestral tradition, found the young Jesus-movement sufficiently offensive to generate his outrage and his efforts to oppose it strenuously.

As to what may have generated his outrage, it is a reasonable proposal that the sort of strong claims about Jesus and the devotional practices that are reflected in his letters were at least one factor. That is, initially he likely found these christological claims and practices to be blasphemous infringements on the exclusivity of the one God that all Jews were expected to maintain, but his revelatory experience led him to embrace the very stance that he had opposed. In his sense of being specifically called to conduct an evangelical mission to gentiles, Paul seems to have felt a distinctive role. But in the core christological beliefs and devotional practices reflected in his letters, Paul was neither distinctive nor creative. Instead, he reflects beliefs and devotional practices that he accepted as part of his religious re-orientation from opponent to proponent of the gospel message.

One of the factors that generated this remarkable devotion to Jesus in earliest Christian circles was, of course, the impact of the historical figure, Jesus of Nazareth. During his own lifetime he generated and became the leader of a movement that was identified specifically with him. Jesus was regarded by his immediate followers and more widely as an authoritative teacher, a healer exercising miraculous power, a prophet sent from God, and perhaps God’s Messiah. But he also generated opposition. With the collusion of the Jerusalem temple authorities, Jesus was executed under the authority of the Roman governor. This appears to reflect the judgement that he claimed to be, or at least was acclaimed by his followers as, the Messiah-king, which amounted to sedition against Roman rule. On the other hand, his followers especially, but also others such as those who sought his favour in healing, revered him, as reflected in the many Gospels scenes where supplicants approach him. But there is no indication that this reverence included the sort of devotional practices that we see reflected in Paul’s letters. In short, although Jesus became the polarizing issue for followers and opponents already during his earthly activity, and was even held to be Messiah by at least some of his followers, he was not given the remarkably high level of reverence that appears to have erupted quickly and early after his crucifixion.

HURTADO, L. W. One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism. 3. ed. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015, 288 p. - ISBN 9780567657718So, additional factors and forces must have played a role in generating what was an unprecedented “mutation” in Jewish devotional practice. Indeed, it is likely that self-identifying Jews could have given Jesus the sort of devotion that we have noted only if they believed that God demanded it. The conviction that God had exalted Jesus to a supreme status and now required him to be reverenced accordingly is reflected in texts such as a passage in Paul’s letter to the Philippians, which declares, “God highly exalted him [Jesus] and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:9-11). Similarly, the Gospel of John makes the claim that God requires “that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father,” and that “anyone who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him” (John 5:23). So, how could early believers have come to this remarkable conviction?

At the earliest stage, we should probably posit powerful experiences as a factor. These likely included visions of the risen and exalted Jesus, perhaps prophetic oracles declaring his exaltation, and also a fervent searching of scriptures to find the meaning and validation of their experiences. As noted already, Paul certainly claimed that his own affirmation of Jesus’ high status was generated in an experience that he took to be a divine revelation. The early encounters with the resurrected Jesus such as those recounted by Paul to the Corinthians likely conveyed more than simply the joy that he had been made alive again (1 Corinthians 15:1-8). Those who had these experiences seem to have been convinced that Jesus’ resurrection also included his installation as Lord over all things. This seems reflected, for example, in Paul’s linkage of Jesus’ resurrection and his supreme rule in a passage in 1 Corinthians (1 Corinthians 15:20-28).

But the exaltation of Jesus to such a lofty status did not involve any diminution of the primacy of God. In fact, practically every christological claim in the New Testament texts is at the same time a theo-logical statement. It is, for example, God who raised Jesus and installed him as supreme Lord. Jesus did not displace God in the beliefs and devotional practices of early believers. Instead, as noted already, their beliefs and practices formed a dyadic pattern involving both the one God and the one Lord, and their reverence of Jesus was understood as obedience to God, and to the glory of God.

For further reading:

Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2003). French edition: Le Seigneur Jésus Christ: La devotion envers Jésus aux premiers temps du christianisme. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 2009.

Larry W. Hurtado, God in New Testament Theology (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010). French edition: <<Dieu>> dans la théologie du Nouveau Testament. Lectio Divina. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 2011.

 

Lembro que o primeiro livro acima citado está traduzido para o português:

HURTADO, L. W. Senhor Jesus Cristo: Devoção a Jesus no cristianismo primitivo. São Paulo: Paulus/Academia Cristã, 2012, 936 p. – ISBN 9788598481494.

Este excelente livro apresenta um estudo histórico detalhado sobre a posição de Jesus na vida religiosa, fé e adoração dos cristãos desde os primórdios do movimento cristão até o fim do segundo século. Ostentando uma abrangência sem precedentes (o livro trata com propriedade desde a história do cristianismo primitivo passando por temas relacionados aos estudos bíblicos até a cristologia do novo Testamento). O livro Senhor Jesus Cristo de Larry Hurtado é de grande importância para diversos estudiosos e bastante acessível para o grande público interessado nas origens cristãs.

Leia também Hurtado Books on Jesus-Devotion – Larry Hurtado’s Blog: December 12, 2017.

Amazônia: a destruição da floresta e a reação internacional

Por

Amazônia vira maior revés da imagem do Brasil em 50 anos, dizem diplomatas

Jamil Chade

Com protestos previstos para está sexta-feira pelo mundo, Itamaraty confirma que embaixadas brasileiras já reforçaram sua segurança. Ao colocar Amazônia no G7, Macron alerta que não vai dar seu apoio ao acordo Mercosul-UE e manda mensagem de que Bolsonaro não tem capacidade de lidar, sozinho, com a crise. “Jamais tivemos nos últimos 50 anos um desastre de imagem tão catastrófico e irreparável como esse”, afirmou ex-ministro Rubens Ricupero.

GENEBRA – A fumaça das queimadas na Amazônia já sufocou o governo Jair Bolsonaro, pelo menos em sua imagem no exterior. No plano internacional, observadores apontam que a crise já poderia ser considerada como o maior revés do Brasil no cenário externo em meio século. Em apenas sete dias, mais de 10 milhões de tuítes foram publicados sobre a crise no país.

O acordo de comércio entre Mercosul e UE também está ameaçado, depois que França e Irlanda anunciaram nesta sexta-feira que vão se opor ao tratado diante da postura brasileira no clima. Até mesmo um pedido de sanções contra o País foi lançado no Reino Unido, enquanto proliferam pedidos da sociedade civil para que governos se distanciem de Bolsonaro.

Emmanuel Macron, que recebe os líderes do G-7 neste fim de semana, decidiu colocar a Amazônia em sua agenda e chamou o tema de “crise internacional”. No fundo, a manobra é vista como tendo o potencial de criar uma pressão internacional sobre o Brasil em termos ambientais.

O UOL apurou que a França, antes de fazer a sugestão, já havia estabelecido um entendimento de que teria o apoio da Alemanha e da chanceler Angela Merkel, ridicularizada por Bolsonaro. A alemã suspendeu sua colaboração para o Fundo Amazônia e, como resposta, recebeu do presidente brasileiro a sugestão de usar o dinheiro para reflorestar a Alemanha.

O cenário desenhado é de que, ao tratar da crise, Macron estipule que Bolsonaro, sozinho, não tem como lidar com a situação da Amazônia.Tamanduá-mirim cego luta para sobreviver em meio ao fogo na Amazônia - Crédito: Araquém Alcântara

Nesta sexta-feira, Merkel já saiu em apoio à proposta francesa e declarou a situação no Brasil como sendo uma “emergência aguda”.

Em Bruxelas, a Comissão Europeia afirmou estar “profundamente preocupada” com a situação e disse que está disposta a ajudar o Brasil. A UE ainda apoiou a ideia de Macron de tratar da crise durante a reunião do G7.

Em Dublin e Paris, os governos já deixam claro que poderão simplesmente vetar o acordo com o Mercosul, assinado há poucas semanas, abrindo uma crise na relação entre a Europa e o Brasil.

Macron ganhou ainda o sinal verde de Justin Trudeau, primeiro-ministro do Canadá e que também estará no G7.

Além da pressão, os governos poderiam lançar um apelo para que o Brasil se comprometa a retomar iniciativas como o Fundo Amazônia ou simplesmente aceitar recursos estrangeiros. Em qualquer um dos casos, isso significaria um monitoramento estrangeiro do que ocorre no Brasil e uma tentativa de blindar o desmonte da política ambiental do País.

Brasil sem voz no G7 só contaria com Trump

Não por acaso, a iniciativa deixou parte do governo enfurecido, diante do risco de que decisões sejam tomadas no fim de semana sem sequer consultar o Brasil. Um dos negociadores que estará na reunião acredita que, ainda mais prejudicial, será o fato de o país não poder se defender diante de um grupo que conta com Macron e Merkel.

Para os funcionários da chancelaria francesa, a dúvida é se Donald Trump sairá ao resgate de seu novo aliado, Jair Bolsonaro. Entre diplomatas brasileiros, a percepção é de que, mesmo que a Casa Branca monte uma blindagem para o Brasil, ela não o fará sem um custo. “Nada é feito nos EUA sem uma contrapartida”, admitiu um diplomata.

O ex-ministro do Meio Ambiente e embaixador Rubens Ricupero foi contundente. “No dia 21 de agosto, percorri todos os principais noticiários da televisão mundial: RAI 1, France 2, BBC, CNN. Todos, até na seção de previsão de tempo, dedicavam atenção principal às queimadas na Amazônia”, disse à reportagem.

“Jamais tivemos nos últimos 50 anos um desastre de imagem tão catastrófico e irreparável como esse”, afirmou o embaixador. “É muitas vezes pior em intensidade, horário nobre, repercussão junto a estadistas e gente do povo do que sucedeu nos piores momentos do regime militar”, alertou.

Segundo Ricupero, está sendo destruído “em poucas horas um esforço que se iniciou na época de Sarney e demandou mais de 30 anos e enormes esforços e recursos”.

“Houve dois momentos em que o Brasil começava a recuperar um pouco sua imagem. O primeiro foi quando Sarney ofereceu o Rio de Janeiro para sediar a maior conferência do clima de todos os tempos, a Rio 92 e Collor honrou o compromisso, um momento alto da diplomacia ambiental brasileira”, argumentou.

“O segundo foi mais recente, a partir do ano em que a taxa de desmatamento principiou a cair e assim permaneceu durante alguns anos. Mesmo assim, a imagem geral, aquela que ficava lá no fundo da mente das pessoas, é que o Brasil era um país agressor do meio ambiente, uma vez que, mesmo nos bons momentos, não faltavam episódios lamentáveis de invasão de terras de índios por garimpeiros, assassinatos de líderes ambientais como o de Chico Mendes e atentados de todo tipo. Agora, o que está ocorrendo pôs tudo a perder”, alertou.

“Desmantelamento”

Ele, porém, não vê uma saída clara. “A situação desta vez é mais grave. Nos governos anteriores, existia uma vontade sincera, mais ou menos eficaz de tentar controlar a destruição. Infelizmente, mesmo os ministros e governos melhor intencionados lutavam em posição desfavorável, uma vez que os empenhados na destruição -grileiros, madeireiros, garimpeiros, fazendeiros pecuaristas – se encontravam presentes em toda a região amazônica, ao contrário do governo, cuja presença era débil e precária”, disse.

“Às vezes, reservas maiores que um país europeu tinham apenas dois funcionários na vigilância! Faltava tudo: aviões, helicópteros, equipamento moderno de comunicação, viaturas. O pouco que se obteve foi graças a doações como as do Fundo Amazônia, que o atual desgoverno está em vias de liquidar”, afirmou.

Para Ricupero, Bolsonaro e seu “antiministro do Meio Ambiente estão consciente e deliberadamente empenhados em destroçar todas as instituições e mecanismos de fiscalização e controle”.

“Desde o começo, o governo intimidou os fiscais, desmoralizou a fiscalização ao denunciar o que chamou de “indústria das multas”, quando é mais do que sabido que mais de 90% das multas nunca são pagas. Em seguida, afastou os funcionários de carreira e nomeou para dirigir o IBAMA e o Instituto Chico Mendes oficias da PM de São Paulo que prosseguiram o trabalho do desmantelamento”, alertou.

Para ele, é falsa a percepção de que Bolsonaro “peca apenas pela língua, pelas suas desastrosas declarações”. “Na verdade, o governo federal a rigor nem precisa fazer nada de especial para que o desmatamento aumente. Basta cruzar os braços, já que os destruidores estão apenas esperando o sinal verde para agir. Sinal que este governo vem fornecendo a cada dia, a cada hora, por meio da impunidade”, disse.

“O que está ocorrendo lembra um episódio sinistro de nossa história: o fim do tráfico de escravos. Foi preciso que a esquadra inglesa começasse a capturar navios tumbeiros dentro de águas territoriais brasileiras e até dentro de nossos portos para que finalmente o governo imperial se decidisse em 1850 a colocar fim ao tráfico. Por que do contrário, os ingleses o fariam. É isso que deseja Bolsonaro?”, questionou.

Na ONU

A percepção de Ricupero ecoa dentro da ONU, onde o Brasil vê sua reputação afetada. Dois embaixadores que pedem para não ser identificados confirmam que, em décadas, jamais viram uma reação internacional contra o Brasil de tal magnitude. “Não me lembro da última vez que o Brasil passou a ser tratado como um pária, como está sendo hoje”, admitiu um deles.

O caso foi considerado como sendo de tal gravidade que António Guterres, secretário-geral das Nações Unidas, saiu de seu tradicional silêncio em temas polêmicos para pedir que a Amazônia seja protegida. “Estou profundamente preocupado pelo fogo na floresta amazônica”, escreveu, alertando que o mundo não poderia se dar ao luxo de perder tal “fonte de oxigênio”.

A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) também se pronunciou, alertando que os acontecimentos no Brasil revelam o risco que enfrenta o planeta.

Fontes na entidade apontam que a crise não se limitará aos assuntos ambientais. Para diplomatas, a capacidade de o Brasil liderar esforços ou campanhas em outras áreas deve ser afetada. “O Brasil é hoje meio tóxico e são poucos os que estão dispostos a embarcar em algum projeto com o país”, disse um experiente negociador.

Pela Europa, parlamentares que terão de votar uma ratificação do acordo comercial com o Mercosul estão sendo pressionados por seus eleitores a não chancelar o tratado com o Brasil. Numa rua de uma cidade austríaca, nesta semana, jovens simularam um enforcamento. Enquanto o gelo aos seus pés derretia, seguravam um cartaz contra o Mercosul e Bolsonaro.

Diplomatas que conversaram com a reportagem do UOL admitiram que as imagens enfraquecem o governo brasileiro e ameaçam até mesmo ser traduzidas em perdas reais para as exportações.

Com os partidos ambientalistas ganhando força pela Europa, deputados sabem que precisam dar uma roupagem “climática” para seus discursos. O resultado, com um Brasil debilitado, pode ser a transformação de Bolsonaro numa espécie de “bola da vez” para que políticos locais mostrem que estão comprometidos com o meio ambiente.

Sanções

No Reino Unido, uma petição foi lançada ao Parlamento Britânico solicitando que o governo faça pressão para que sanções sejam impostas contra o Brasil, por conta da floresta. Até a manhã de sexta-feira (horário europeu) e em poucas horas, a petição já contava com 40 mil assinaturas.

Não faltaram ainda aqueles que, se aproveitando de um clima deteriorado para o Brasil, embarquem numa nova campanha para minar as exportações brasileiras e evitar a concorrência.

Na Noruega, que negocia um acordo de livre comércio com o Mercosul, a Associação dos Produtores Agrícolas alertou ao governo de Oslo que os consumidores noruegueses precisavam ser respeitados e que um acordo com o Brasil não deveria ser fechado.

Para eles, um norueguês deve poder comer uma carne “sem ter de ter a consciência pesada” por estar desmatando a Amazônia. Mas sua real preocupação era outra: a capacidade dos produtos agrícolas do Brasil de minar a rentabilidade de seus próprios agricultores.

Na França, entidades de agricultores que sempre foram contra um acordo com o Mercosul agora adotaram o lema ambientalista para justificar seu pedido por barreiras.

De fato, em Brasília, o governo oficialmente instruiu seus diplomatas a defender a soberania do país sobre a Amazônia e a colocar em questão as reais intenções de ONGs. O discurso ainda inclui uma tentativa de qualificar os ataques contra o Brasil como uma espécie de estratégia de protecionismo comercial.

Mas, entre uma parcela menos radical do governo, o temor é de que não apenas as chamas na floresta saíram do controle. Com uma ampla campanha internacional, a percepção é de que a imagem do País queima junto com sua floresta. E os prejuízos podem ser enormes, politicamente e em termos comerciais.

Segurança reforçada

No centro do mundo e na periferia do Brasil, a realidade é que a floresta conseguiu unir artistas, políticos de diferentes partidos e, acima de tudo, a opinião pública contra o chefe de estado brasileiro.

Para esta sexta-feira, protestos estão sendo organizados diante de embaixadas do Brasil pelo mundo, enquanto nos bastidores do Itamaraty muitos temem depredações e ações mais contundentes. Desde o início do governo, foram pelo menos quatro incidentes e quase todos com recados sobre a situação ambiental do país.

Ao UOL, o Itamaraty confirmou que “os postos no exterior já adotaram medidas de reforço de segurança, conforme avaliação da necessidade local”.

Grupos de estudantes querem usar o dia de protestos, nesta sexta-feira, para também dedicar uma mensagem especial ao presidente brasileiro. Nesta semana, personalidades como Leonardo DiCaprio e Greta Thunberg usaram as redes sociais para denunciar a destruição da floresta, levando críticas a Bolsonaro a milhões de seguidores.

Em diversos países europeus, o assunto se transformou em um dos “trending topics” das redes sociais, obrigando até mesmo membros do governo a postar mensagens em inglês.

Dentro da ONU, um antigo chefe de negociações de desarmamento comentava, ao ver estampada as imagens da Amazônia em chamas na imprensa de todo o mundo, na prateleira de uma banca de jornais dentro das Nações Unidas.

“Bom, quem até agora não conhecia Bolsonaro, agora sabe quem é: aquele que está permitindo a destruição da floresta”, completou.

Fonte: Jamil Chade – 23/08/2019

Mês da Bíblia 2019: Primeira Carta de João

Por

O tema do Mês da Bíblia 2019 é “Para que n’Ele nossos povos tenham vida – Primeira Carta de João”. Trata-se do quarto e último ano do ciclo do tema “Para que n’Ele nossos povos tenham vida”. No primeiro ano em 2016 refletiu-se sobre a Profecia de Miqueias. No segundo ano em 2017 foi a Primeira Carta aos Tessalonicenses. Em 2018 no terceiro ano foi o Livro da Sabedoria. Neste quarto ano 2019 é a vez da Primeira Carta de João.

Mês da Bíblia 2019: Primeira Carta de João - Texto-baseO lema do Mês da Bíblia 2019 é “Nós amamos porque Deus primeiro nos amou” (1Jo 419). O verbo amar é uma palavra chave da Primeira Carta de João. O lema recorda que o amor provém de Deus e chega a todas as criaturas. O amor é convite que pede uma resposta que é amar. Assim a resposta ao amor de Deus é o amor aos irmãos.

O mês de setembro se tornou referência para o estudo e a contemplação da Palavra de Deus, tornando-se em todo o Brasil, desde 1971, o Mês da Bíblia. Desde o Concílio Vaticano II, convocado em dezembro de 1961, pelo papa João XXIII, a Bíblia ocupou espaço privilegiado na família, nos círculos bíblicos, na catequese, nos grupos de reflexão, nas comunidades eclesiais.

Este ano, 2019, será o 48º em que a Igreja no Brasil comemora o Mês da Bíblia. Neste sentido, a Comissão Episcopal Pastoral para a Animação Bíblico-Catequética da Conferência Nacional dos Bispos do Brasil (CNBB), dando continuidade ao ciclo do tema “Para que n’Ele nossos povos tenham vida” propôs para o Mês da Bíblia o estudo da Primeira Carta de João, com destaque para o lema “Nós amamos porque Deus primeiro nos amou” (1Jo 4,19).

Dom Peruzzo, presidente da Comissão ressalta que o texto-base não se trata de um livro para especialistas, tampouco para quem desconhece a Primeira Carta de João. “Certamente servirá de aprofundamento para agentes de pastoral, para animadores de comunidades, para catequistas (…)”, afirmou o bispo.

Ele garante também que a boa didática e a sensibilidade pedagógica presentes nas páginas escritas pelo autor, o professor Cláudio Malzoni, de Recife, ensejarão grande apreço por este escrito do Novo Testamento. “Que o estudo da Primeira Carta de João mova-nos e comova-nos a diálogos fraternos e a convivências pacificadoras, amando-nos uns aos outros”, exorta o bispo.

No texto-base, lançado pela Editora CNBB, logo em suas primeiras páginas são dadas algumas orientações básicas sobre a Primeira Carta de João, importantes para situá-la em seu contexto histórico, literário e teológico. À medida que o leitor avança poderá encontrar informações básicas referentes ao gênero literário, ao autor e aos interlocutores, aos temas teológicos principais, à época e ao lugar de composição da Carta. Nos capítulos seguintes, o autor busca fazer uma exposição passo a passo.

O subsídio pode ser adquirido no site da Edições CNBB: www.edicoescnbb.com.br

Fonte: CNBB

 

Primeira carta de João. Vida Pastoral, São Paulo, n. 329, 2019.

A primeira carta de João é o texto escolhido para estudo no mês da Bíblia deste ano. Vida Pastoral traz até você nossa colaboração para reflexão, aprofundamento e vivência da riqueza deste escrito sagrado.

Sabe-se que a carta é um dos meios de comunicação mais antigos do mundo. Foi também a principal forma de comunicação entre as primeiras comunidades cristãs. A carta geralmente leva em conta circunstâncias próprias e contém informações de interesse específico do destinatário.

Escrita por volta dos últimos anos do século I, a primeira carta de São João se destina a um grupo de igrejas ligadas diretamente ao apóstolo, especificamente a umPrimeira carta de João. Vida Pastoral, São Paulo, n. 329, 2019. público misto de pagãos e de judeus convertidos ao cristianismo. O tema central diz respeito à fé na encarnação do Filho de Deus e ao amor ao próximo.

Havia nas primeiras comunidades cristãs uma confusão imensa acerca da identidade de Jesus Cristo. Certos grupos dissociavam o Jesus histórico do Cristo da fé, de modo que separavam a fé da vida como ela é. Alguns, inclusive, tinham uma visão totalmente negativa sobre a condição humana, concepção que os levava a não admitir que Jesus fosse verdadeiramente humano. Isso gerava a mentalidade de que não era necessário o amor ao próximo, mas somente o amor a Deus, bem como o conhecimento que a pessoa tinha de sua origem e destino. A primeira carta de João se insere justamente nessas circunstâncias, com o objetivo de conscientizar as mentes e resolver os conflitos na comunidade. O que interessa a João é esclarecer seus leitores sobre o verdadeiro Jesus. “Quem reconhece que Jesus Cristo veio na carne, esse vem da parte de Deus” (1Jo 4,2).

Em posse do texto da primeira carta de João, o leitor pode notar que cada capítulo é uma espécie de homilia ou meditação, exortando a comunidade sobre os perigos de uma concepção errada de Jesus e a necessidade de conversão; isto é, para um testemunho autêntico da fé, é necessário que cada cristão testemunhe em palavras e atitudes Jesus Cristo feito carne. Isso se dá mediante a experiência do amor ao próximo. O amor nos aproxima de Deus. “Quem não ama não conhece a Deus, porque Deus é amor” (1Jo 4,8). Quem ama não nega Jesus feito homem, verdadeira carne humana.

O amor é a verdadeira luz que ilumina a comunidade e a faz capaz de dissipar a treva da divisão. Portanto, no mundo os cristãos são chamados a realizar aquilo que Jesus realizou. O sopro de Deus que levou Jesus a realizar sua obra está também em nós. O sopro é o que nos faz perceber e sentir que no amor não há o medo. Em tempos de ódio e de imposição de medos, a leitura e meditação da primeira carta de João nos inspiram a ternura e a alegria de viver no amor.

Fonte: Carta do editor – Vida Pastoral: Setembro-Outubro de 2019

Grande Sertão: Veredas – Travessias

Por

Grande Sertão: Veredas. Travessias

Revista IHU On-Line Edição 538 | 05 Agosto 2019Grande Sertão: Veredas. Travessias - IHU On-Line Edição 538 | 05 Agosto 2019

Editorial

Travessia. Essa é a outra forma que Guimarães Rosa encontrou de nos ensinar a escrever e dizer a palavra vida. A última palavra de sua obra Grande Sertão: Veredas é que liga o fio do tempo, o passado e o presente, de um Brasil, que tanto antes como agora, é o país que poderia ter sido, mas nunca foi. A jagunçagem, para usar um termo do autor, é uma forma política presente em muitas instâncias e nos joga diante de desafios e contradições enormes. Para tratar de literatura e do Brasil atual, oito especialistas se debruçam sobre a obra de Guimarães Rosa. A capa desta edição é assinada pela artista Anna Cunha.

Faustino Teixeira, professor e pesquisador do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência da Religião da Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora – UFJF, faz uma apresentação da obra em perspectiva com vários autores e leituras de Guimarães Rosa.

Kathrin Rosenfield, professora nos programas de pós-graduação em Letras e em Filosofia da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul – UFRGS, fala sobre o dilaceramento existencial brasileiro em Grande sertão: veredas. “Um terceiro alicerce para a tradição imaginária brasileira seria a recuperação artística da musicalidade das falas regionais e das suas saborosas metáforas concretas.”

Willi Bolle, professor titular de Literatura na Universidade de São Paulo – USP, lembra que “enquanto Gilberto Freyre usa o símbolo de um entrelaçamento harmonioso (&) entre senhores e escravos, Guimarães Rosa, através dos dois pontos ( : ) acentua o antagonismo entre os donos de territórios e casas ‘grandes’ e os que moram em casebres nas ‘veredas’”.

Marcia Marques de Morais, professora da Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais – PUC Minas, faz uma leitura da obra de Guimarães Rosa em chave psicanalítica. “Guimarães Rosa trata a linguagem, essa sim, a verdadeira protagonista de sua obra. Esse trato, para além de ser um traço lúdico a apresentar desafios para o leitor, piscadelas do autor em direção a seu leitor, é, sem dúvida, propiciador do enlace entre literatura e psicanálise.”

Eduardo de Faria Coutinho, um dos mais renomados acadêmicos em Literatura Comparada e professor titular da disciplina na Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro – UFRJ, escreve sobre o convite ao pensar ético que Guimarães Rosa convoca. “Sufocado por um cotidiano calcado na continuidade, que se expressa pela repetição mecânica de atos e gestos, o homem, e em particular o adulto comum, não percebe a automatização a que se sujeita.”

Adair de Aguiar Neitzel, professora titular da Universidade do Vale do Itajaí – Univali, discute as mulheres rosianas. “É pelas mãos de Diadorim que Riobaldo passa do estado físico para o estético e deste para o Moral. Mas é uma relação marcada pela ambiguidade, contradição, angústia de estar se envolvendo com um homem. Essa tensão que se estabelece entre ambos, por conta de uma paixão impossível na jagunçagem, torna esse amor uma neblina.”

Eduardo Guerreiro Brito Losso, professor associado de Teoria Literária do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência da Literatura da UFRJ, relaciona a literatura de Guimarães Rosa à mística. “Pois acho, justamente, que a defesa de Rosa do predomínio da dimensão metafísico-religiosa de sua obra tem a ver com o desejo dele de mexer com esse perigo, já que, se tem alguém que gosta de perigos, é ele.”

Terezinha Maria Scher Pereira, professora da UFJF, relata a multiplicidade de Guimarães Rosa. “No Grande sertão: veredas, o processo é uma reflexão filosófica, existencial, para pôr em questão o panorama cultural da razão moderna, no momento do processo desenvolvimentista do Brasil do século XX.”

Este numero da revista contou com a importante e fundamental parceria do Prof. Dr. Faustino Teixeira, a quem agradecemos a generosa contribuição.

A arqueologia usada como ferramenta política em Israel

Por

Arqueólogos sionistas americanos fazem escavações em território palestino ocupado para promover suas crenças messiânicas e legitimar a ocupação israelense. Aqui é relatado o caso de Tel Shiloh, a localidade bíblica de Silo (1Sm 1,3; 4,1-11).

O arqueólogo Scott Stripling, cristão evangélico, acredita que a Bíblia deve ser lida literalmente e usada como um roteiro para sua pesquisa. “A Bíblia é um documento histórico confiável? Alguns colegas israelenses discordam, mas eu acredito que sim”, diz ele. “Por um lado, temos o Antigo Testamento e, por outro lado, artefatos arqueológicos. Existe uma verossimilhança? Isso é o que esperamos. Mas eu não ando por aí com uma Bíblia em uma mão e uma pá na outra”.

Israel usa a arqueologia como uma ferramenta política em Jerusalém Oriental e na Cisjordânia para tentar justificar sua presença. Isso explica por que eles estão trabalhando com os evangélicos, que apoiam a mesma narrativa. Os evangélicos não fazem pesquisa para o benefício da comunidade local, mas para seu próprio benefício e para apoiar a ocupação, diz Yonathan Mizrachi, diretor da ONG israelense Emek Shaveh.

 

Digging in the Holy Land: Evangelicals are excavating occupied soil to help their cause, and Israel’s

American, ultra-religious archaeologists are descending on the West Bank to promote their beliefs

A day of archaeological digging by the Associates for Biblical Research always begins with a reading of the Bible, the very text of which they are trying to demonstrate the historical reliability.

“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life,” repeated the group of twenty ideologically-driven Evangelical Christians, mostly pro-Israel Americans on the white religious right of the faith at odds with many of its strands in the Middle East.

Escavações em Tel Shiloh, Cisjordânia. Foto: Amnon GutmanIt is barely 5am in Jerusalem, and team members are just boarding a bus heading to Tel Shiloh, an archaeological site on private Palestinian land in Area C of the occupied West Bank, which is subjected to full Israeli control.

There, they say, may lie the remains of the tabernacle – the shrine that is believed to have hosted the Ark of the Covenant, a wooden chest said to have held the ten commandments on two stone tablets.

The dig site is suffused with a mild morning light. In a camel-coloured cowboy hat and sunglasses, always flashing a bright smile, team leader Dr Scott Stripling, 54, fits the Hollywood picture of an archaeologist. His work, however, is far from conventional.

A proud Evangelical Christian, he and his team believe the Bible is to be read literally and it serves as a textbook for their research.

“Is the Bible a reliable historical document? Some Israeli colleagues disagree, but I believe so,” says Mr Stripling, also arguing that many archaeologists are biased against the “holy word”.

“On the one hand, we have the Old Testament and, on the other hand, archaeological artefacts. Is there a verisimilitude? That’s what we expect.

“But I don’t walk around with a Bible in one hand and a shovel in the other.”

It is the third year of the excavation in Tel Shiloh and Mr Stripling hopes to find new clues to confirm that the elusive tabernacle was once located here. Last year, they discovered a ceramic pomegranate, a fruit symbolically associated with the holy shrine.

The pieces unearthed in Tel Shiloh are brought back to Jerusalem each day, before being analysed in collaboration with the Israeli antiquities authorities in a process critics say is disturbingly opaque. In mid-May, the Supreme Court ruled that Israel is not obligated to release information about archaeological digs in the occupied West Bank, rejecting an appeal by two non-governmental organisations.

“Everything we find is stored in Israel and if a political solution to [the Israeli-Palestinian] conflict is found, the people in charge of the territory will then have access to the objects,” Mr Stripling says.

“But I’ll be dead before that happens,” he laughs.

The inter-religious relationship between some Israeli Jews and American Evangelicals is sometimes labelled opportunistic. A subset of the Evangelical community believes that the return of the Jewish people to the land of their ancestors is necessary for the return of the Messiah and the end of times, as laid out in the Bible. Israeli authorities, meanwhile, are searching for allies to support their half-century old military occupation.

Emeline and Perry Ginhart, a newly-wed American couple, hope to make more discoveries that will help support the authenticity of their Messianic vision of Christianity. They visited Tel Shiloh last May for their honeymoon, paying thousands of dollars to be allowed to take part in the dig. Both amateurs with no professional experience in archaeology, they spent long hours clearing the tiny area of dirt they were in charge of under the scorching sun.

“By helping Israel, we are helping our cause. Our creator gave us these lands to take care of,” says Mr Ginhart.

Leah Tramer, one of the few Israelis in the team, is a former research assistant at Tel Aviv University and a self-declared “former leftist”. She says her political views changed after a particularly violent attack by Palestinian militants.

Since then, she has been working for the University of Ariel, located in a large Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank. She helps American Evangelicals who come to the area to dig – to them, Judea and Samaria, the biblical name they give to the West Bank, is a natural extension to the current Israeli state.

“There is nothing more exciting than doing research related to the Bible,” she says.

“It is wonderful that Christians are helping us to recover our past.”

Archaeological finds are used in a political and ideological context as theoretical evidence for the importance of Jewish heritage over Palestinian links to the land.

“Israel uses archaeology as a political tool in East Jerusalem and the West Bank to try to justify its presence. This explains why they are working with Evangelicals, who support the same narrative,” Yonathan Mizrachi, director of the left-wing Israeli NGO Emek Shaveh, told The National.

“Evangelicals don’t do research for the benefit of the local community but for their own benefit and to support the occupation.”

Many other sites beside Tel Shiloh have raised controversy, in a land where archaeology is inherently political. The City of David in occupied East Jerusalem’s Palestinian neighbourhood of Silwan (also known as Wadi Hilweh) is, according to biblical references, the original site of Jerusalem at the time of King David some 3,000 years ago. It is now a popular pilgrimage site for Evangelicals from all over the world.

Last month, US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman and White House Mideast peace envoy Jason Greenblatt participated in an inaugural ceremony there to unveil the “Pilgrimage Road,” a now-subterranean stairway that is said to have served as a sacred Roman-era road for Jews to the Temple Mount.

According to local residents, underground excavations at the site, which have lasted for years, have severely damaged 15 Palestinian houses.

Mazen Aweida, 48, points to thick cracks running along the walls of his home, where the kitchen sink has half-collapsed and the bedroom floor has buckled.

“We’re miserable,” he says.

“I have young children and I’m afraid debris will fall on them. It stresses me out a lot,” the father of seven whispers, glancing at his little boy sitting next to a gaping scar running from the floor to the ceiling.

Many residents are convinced that archaeological digs are part of a broader strategy to drive Palestinians out and take control of their land.

The City of David Foundation, a nationalist Israeli organisation behind the project and known by its Hebrew initials ELAD, declined a request to comment, but it has previously denied responsibility for damage to Palestinian homes.

A European specialist who has been working in the Middle East for decades decried Biblical archaeology, questioning those who believe that all of the Bible was intended to be understood literally.

“The Israeli army must stop the archaeological massacre in the occupied territories,” said the specialist, who asked not to be named.

At 1pm, the sound of a shofar, a traditional Jewish horn, echoes through the rocky hills of Tel Shiloh to mark the end of the day’s dig. But those taking part will be back tomorrow in search of the holy tabernacle, despite the fact that they are yet to find anything decisive.

“The absence of proof,” says Mr Stripling, “is not the proof of absence.”

Fonte: Wilson Fache and Salomé Parent – The National: July 29, 2019