Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T19:51:03.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Dignified’: An Exegetical Soteriology of Divine Honour

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 January 2013

Jason Borges
Jason Borges*
Affiliation:
2144 Ebbesen Lane, San Jose, CA 95124, USAjasangborges@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Social scientists in disparate fields are now employing the construct of honour to ameliorate various social problems, such as immorality, failed states, international discord, poverty and mental illness. Moreover, historians of global religion cite Christianity's shift towards cultures shaped by the values of honour and shame. Despite this growing prominence of honour in social theories and the emergence of Christianity in honour–shame cultures, the notion of honour remains absent from theological discourse. In light of these global realities, we explore how God's active transformation of humanity from shame to honour can interpret both salvation-history and Christian theology. To this end I first explore the nature of humanity's problem of shame before God, using anthropological and biblical insights. Throughout the Old Testament, God's covenant initiatives with Abram, Moses and David, along with the common socio-literary pattern of God exalting a servant from unjust shame, reveals the dignified status God intends for humanity. God's programme to restore people from shame to honour climaxes in Jesus, who embodies honour in the incarnation, mediates dignity to the marginalised by healings and public fellowship, elaborates God's new code of honour which reinterprets social stigmas, and procures an exalted status for all peoples by atoning for shame and resurrecting to exaltation. Romans and 1 Peter are interpreted in their socio-historic contexts as apostolic instruments which expound the social implications of God's honour code. To unify the fractured Romans for the upcoming Spanish mission, Paul confronts social imperialism by replacing false honour claims with God's status now available by faith through grace in Christ. Meanwhile, 1 Peter assures maligned Christians of their exalted status and outlines honourable social relations. Then, in closing, we examine a soteriology of honour diachronically and systematically. In particular, how: biblical metaphors symbolise believers’ status transposition, group incorporation is key to New Testament soteriology, Eastern Orthodoxy's doctrine of theosis articulates the infusion of divine status, and other theological categories could be interpreted through honour-shame social values. These reflections towards an exegetical soteriology of divine honour are offered as an initial theological platform for addressing social issues where honour values prevail.

Keywords

dignityhonourmajority-world theologyshamesoteriology
Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 66 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 74 - 87
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Appiah, K. A., The Honor Code: How Moral Revolutions Happen (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2010)Google Scholar.

2 Power, Samantha, Sergio (New York: Penguin, 2010), p. 531Google Scholar.

3 Kinzer, Stephen, Reset: Iran, Turkey and America's Future (New York: Times Books, 2010)Google Scholar.

4 Narayan, Deepa, Voices of the Poor (New York: OUP, 2000)Google Scholar, cited in Corbett, Steve and Fikkert, Brian, When Helping Hurts (Chicago: Moody, 2009), pp. 51–4Google Scholar.

5 Sanneh, Lamin, Disciples of All Nations: Pillars of World Christianity (Oxford: OUP, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jenkins, Philip, The Next Christendom (New York: OUP, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robert, Dana, ‘Shifting Southward: Global Christianity since 1945’, International Bulletin of Missionary Research 24:2 (2000), pp. 50–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Theological forays into honour and shame include William Lad Sessions, ‘Honor and God’, Journal of Religion (2007), pp. 206–24; Adams, Marilyn McCord, ‘Symbolic Value: Honor and Shame’, in her Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999), pp. 106–28Google Scholar; Moltmann, Jürgen, On Human Dignity: Political Theology and Ethics (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1984), pp. 3–60Google Scholar.

7 1 Rivers, J. P., ‘Honor’, in Sills, D. L. (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York: Macmillan, 1968), pp. 503–11Google Scholar.

8 Nicomachean Ethics 4.3.9–12.

9 Benedict, Ruth, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture (Cambridge, MA: Riverside Press, 1946)Google Scholar.

10 Rivers, ‘Honor’, p. 503.

11 Dunn, James, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmanns, 1998), p. 93Google Scholar.

12 Jewett, Paul, ‘Honor in Argument of Romans’, in Brown, A., Snyder, G. F. and Wiles, V. (eds), Putting Body and Soul Together (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press, 1997), p. 265Google Scholar.

13 Cross, Frank Moore, ‘Kinship and Covenant in Ancient Israel’, in his From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998), pp. 6–7Google Scholar.

14 Olyan, Saul, ‘Honor, Shame and Covenant Relations in Ancient Israel and its Environments’, Journal of Biblical Literature 115:2 (1996), pp. 201–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Beale, Gregory, The Temple and the Church's Mission (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2004), pp. 66–80Google Scholar. Cf. Num 3:7–8; 18:7.

16 This reading that God has chosen Israel for a covenant relationship in order to restore the glory of Adam was common at Qumran: 1QS 4:22–3; CD 3:19f; 1QH 17:14–15; 4QpPs 37 3:1–2.

17 Lanaik, Timothy, Shame and Honor in Esther, SBLDS 165 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars, 1998), pp. 7–17Google Scholar. The books of Genesis, Exodus and Judges employ cascading cycles of this literary pattern to express a theology of salvation as honour.

18 Such as: a noble birth marked by reputable descent and divine portents, mediation of God's benefaction, power over spirits and nature, public defence of opponents’ challenges, faithful obedience, purity and holiness, divine affirmation and worship from others.

19 Wright, N. T., Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1996), pp. 191–2Google Scholar.

20 Green, Joel, The Theology of the Gospel of Luke (Cambridge: CUP, 1995), pp. 76–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Neyrey, J. H., Honor and Shame in Matthew (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), pp. 164–211Google Scholar. Also, Hanson, K. C., ‘How Honorable! How Shameful! A Cultural Analysis of Matthew's Makarisms and Reproaches’, Semenia 68 (1996), pp. 81–112Google Scholar.

22 Wright, Victory of God, p. 432.

23 DeSilva, D. A., Honor, Patronage, Kinship, and Purity (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2000), pp. 279–304Google Scholar.

24 Hence the repeated citations to Psalm 22, a lament of the righteous one's humiliation in which the language of shame is integral, in the Synoptic passion narratives, cf. Hengel, Martin, Crucifixion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), pp. 1–10Google Scholar. On the restoration of God's honour, see Anselm, Cur Deus Homo, 11–15.

25 The standard trans. of ‘ἠγoράσθητε γὰρ τιμη ς’ (1 Cor 6:20) is ‘you were bought with a price’. Τιμη ς, a genitive of means, can be ‘price, value’ or ‘honour, reverence’ according to BDAG. The trans. ‘you were bought with his honour’ accords well exegetically with the subsequent imperative for believers to now honour God with their body, seeing how Christ purchased our honour by enduring shame in his body. This theological interpretation is collaborated by: John's association of glory with the cross, the severe humiliation endured on the cross and the fact that honour is symbolised with the shedding of blood.

26 Baker, Mark, ‘Atonement’, in his Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2006), pp. 94–5Google Scholar.

27 Georges, Jayson, ‘From Shame to Honor: A Theological Reading of Romans for Honor-Shame Contexts’, Missiology: An International Review 38:3 (2010), pp. 295–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Jewett, ‘Honor and Shame’, p. 268.

29 Salvific honour in Christ is communicated through multiple rhetorical expressions in Romans, such as: blessed, heirs, strength, life, sanctified, glorified, the Spirit and adoption.

30 Corrigan, C. M., ‘Paul's Shame for the Gospel’, Biblical Theology Bulletin 16 (1986), pp. 23–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Elliott, John, 1 Peter, Anchor Bible 37B (New Haven, CT: Doubleday, 2000), pp. 425–8Google Scholar.

32 Elliott, John, ‘Disgraced Yet Graced’, Biblical Theology Bulletin 24 (1994), p. 173Google Scholar.

33 Ibid., p. 174.

34 Stendahl, Krister, ‘The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West’, in Paul among Jews and Gentiles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), pp. 85–6Google Scholar.

35 Hays, Richard, ‘“Have we found Abraham to be our forefather according to the flesh?” A Reconsideration of Rom 4:1’, Novum Testamentum 27 (1985), pp. 76–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Hays, Richard, The Moral Vision of New Testament (San Francisco, CA: Harper, 1996)Google Scholar; Hays, Richard, ‘Ecclesiology and Ethics in 1 Corinthians’, Ex Auditu 10 (1994), pp. 31–43Google Scholar; N. T. Wright, ‘Paul and the People of God: Whence and Whether Pauline Studies and the Life of the Church’ (lecture, Wheaton, IL, 18 April 2010) adumbrated how his forthcoming NTPG book on Paul understands the formation of united communities as the central praxis of and main entry point to Pauline theology.

37 Christopher Flanders, ‘About Face: Reorienting Thai Face for Soteriology and Mission’ (Ph.D. dissertation; Fuller Theological Seminary, School of Intercultural Studies, 2005), p. 355.

38 Ware, Timothy, The Orthodox Church, 2nd edn (London: Penguin Press, 1993), p. 22Google Scholar.

39 DeSilva, Honour, Patronage, pp. 304–7.