bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John
Authors: Friesen Steven J. 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
Examines the relationship between imperial cults and the Book of Revelation, focusing especially on the Roman province of Asia during the early Empire. The main argument is that Revelation and imperial cult institutions were in direct contradiction regarding cosmology and eschatology. The exaggerated cosmology of imperial cult institutions resulted in an absurd eschatology – their emphasis on Roman imperial order was so strong that they could not envision an end to Roman rule. Revelation, on the other hand, denigrated all temporal authority and focused attention on the throne of God in heaven and the eschatological inauguration of the New Jerusalem. In this way, the author of Revelation produced one of humanity's great religious critiques of hegemony, a critique that attempted to establish and maintain a just community in the face of imperial oppression.
Working With Myth
Authors: Friesen Steven J. 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
The inherent instability of Revelation's cosmology was mitigated to some extent by John's use of myth. John established an east Mediterranean ethos for the congregations through his use of the combat myth. A comparison with the myths displayed on the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias shows that John also reworked the traditions of Israel in a way that allowed him to challenge the Roman imperial interpretation of the meaning of history.
Believe and be Baptized
Authors: Mulder Philip N. 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
A distinct Baptist piety grew through the efforts of aggressive Calvinists who compromised the various interests of Particular, Regular, General, and Separate Baptists invading the South. Individual Baptists had to conform to this new hybrid orthodoxy, converting to meet the doctrinal standards, and measuring their religious progress according to a notion of definitive truth: believer baptism by immersion. Baptists’ congregational churches, collections of these converts, contained heated debate and close discipline that perpetuated the evaluative sensibility. In their quest for the truth, they argued, split, re‐formed, and even developed associations of churches for helpful conversation; yet these added more layers of doctrinal debate, extending the rancor and confrontation within Baptists’ insistent religiosity.
Contending for Liberty
Authors: Mulder Philip N. 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
The American Revolution heightened the differences between Presbyterians, Baptists, and Methodists as the dissenters addressed the political crisis through petitions and met the resultant disestablishment of the Church of England on their own terms. Presbyterians generally embraced the Revolutionary cause, but they maneuvered primarily to achieve their long‐sought goal of gaining parity with the Anglican, now Protestant Episcopal Church, allowing for multiple establishments when the plans included Presbyterians. Baptists faced the matters resolved to maintain their absolute principles, and they were pleasantly surprised when Virginia, prompted by Thomas Jefferson's Statute for Religious Freedom, seemed to embrace some Baptist truth by striking down establishment. Francis Asbury dreamed that Methodists could stay neutral, truly separating religion from unholy matters, but he suffered when John Wesley rebuked the patriots and when most Methodist leaders fled the troubled colonies. Methodism would recover, but only by transforming into an American denomination and joining the other evangelicals already in contention for their own particular notions of religious liberty.
Warranted Christian Belief
Authors: Plantinga Alvin 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
In this book's companion volumes (Warrant: The Current Debate and Warrant and Proper Function), I examined the nature of epistemic warrant, that quantity, enough of which distinguishes knowledge from mere true belief; in this book, I turn to the question of whether Christian belief can be justified, rational, and warranted. Among objections to Christian belief, we can distinguish between de facto objections and de jure objections, i.e., between those that claim that Christian belief is false (de facto objections) and those that claim that Christian belief, whether or not true, is at any rate unjustifiable, or rationally unjustified, or irrational, or not intellectually respectable, or in some other way rationally unacceptable (de jure objections). The main question of this book is the question of whether there are any viable de jure objections to Christian belief; I argue that there are not. In Part I (Chs. 1 and 2), I consider and address an initial objection to my project: the objection that there isn’t really any such thing as Christian belief (or at any rate that Christian belief is incoherent) since human concepts cannot apply to a transcendent God. In Part II, I explore, first, the question of whether a viable de jure objection to Christian belief can be developed in terms of justification or rationality (Chs. 3 and 4); after arguing for a negative answer to that question, I turn to the objections offered by Freud, Marx, and Nietzche, objections best understood as the claim that theistic and Christian belief lack warrant (Ch. 5). In Part III, Ch. 6, I address this claim, doing so by presenting a model of how it is that belief in God can have warrant, and even warrant sufficient for knowledge; I call this model the Aquinas/Calvin (or A/C) model, since it draws on the thought of Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin. In Ch. 7, I consider the noetic effects of sin, and the way in which the existence of sin throws a monkey wrench into the A/C model. In Chs. 8 and 9, I extend the A/C model in such a way as to deal both with sin and with the full panoply of Christian belief (trinity, incarnation, atonement, resurrection, etc.); the extended A/C model shows how full‐blooded Christian belief (not just theistic belief) can have warrant. After dealing with objections to the A/C model in Ch. 10, I turn in Part IV to potential or actual defeaters for Christian belief – possible reasons to give it up or hold it less firmly. The proposed defeaters I examine relate to projection theories of religious belief (Ch. 11), contemporary historical biblical criticism (Ch. 12), postmodernism and religious pluralism (Ch. 13), and the age‐old problem of evil (Ch. 14); none of these, I argue, presents a serious challenge to the warrant Christian belief can enjoy.
Kant
Authors: Plantinga Alvin 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
My interest in Warranted Christian Belief is in this question: Is it rational, or reasonable, or justified, or warranted to accept Christian belief? But there is a prior question: Is the very idea of Christian belief coherent? Many theologians and others believe that there is real difficulty with the idea that our concepts could apply to such a being as the Christian God (infinite and transcendent as he is supposed to be), and that this constitutes a serious problem for Christian belief: Christian belief involves the belief that it is possible to think of, refer to, and predicate properties of God, but in fact none of these things are possible, because human concepts cannot apply to God (so goes the argument). In this chapter and the next, I examine this objection to Christian belief, turning in this chapter to the thought of Immanuel Kant. Against the opinions of some, I argue that there is no good reason provided by Kant (or constructible from materials found in Kant) for the conclusion that our concepts do not apply to God.
Justification and the Classical Picture
Authors: Plantinga Alvin 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
Since the Enlightenment, most discussions of the rational justifiability of religious belief have assumed the truth of evidentialism, the view that religious belief is rationally justifiable or acceptable only if there is good evidence for it, where good evidence usually means good propositional evidence. But what is this rational justification, and why does it require propositional evidence, and why did everyone just take for granted this connection between justification and propositional evidence? In order to address these questions I turn first to the thought of John Locke, and then to an examination of the classical picture (or classical package) comprised of evidentialism, deontologism, and classical foundationalism – a picture of which Locke is a main source. After briefly indicating the great extent to which the classical picture is still with us in contemporary discussions of religious belief, I point out some of the crippling problems the classical picture faces, and then consider contemporary analogical extensions of the various elements of the classical picture to see whether any of them supports evidentialism. I conclude that in fact there is no reason at all to think that Christian belief requires argument or propositional evidence if it is to be justified; Christians can be justified even if they don’t hold their beliefs on the basis of arguments or evidence, even if they aren’t aware of any good arguments for their beliefs, and even if, indeed, there aren’t any such arguments.
The Extended Aquinas/Calvin Model: Revealed to Our Minds
Authors: Plantinga Alvin 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
In Ch. 6, I presented a model (the Aquinas/Calvin, or A/C, model), which illustrates how belief in God could have the three varieties of positive epistemic status with which we have been concerned: justification, rationality, and warrant. My main aim in this chapter is to extend the A/C model to cover full‐blooded Christian belief (e.g., belief not just in God, but in trinity, incarnation, atonement, salvation, Christ's resurrection, etc.); this model (the extended A/C model) illustrates how Christian belief can be justified, rational, and warranted. The central elements of the extended A/C model are the Bible, the internal instigation of the Holy Spirit, and faith; I begin the chapter with a quick overview of these three elements. I then look more carefully at faith, which is, in part, belief in the central teachings of the gospel that results from the internal instigation of the Holy Spirit, and show how Christian belief can be justified, rational, and warranted, according to the model. In the final four sections of the chapter, I (1) explore and defend the claim that Christian belief is properly basic, (2) show why the supernaturally inspired writings (the Bible) and the individual action of the Holy Spirit, which are part of the model are so important (and here I scrutinize one popular approach to Christian apologetics), and (3) argue that if Christian belief is true, then very likely it does have warrant in the way suggested by the extended A/C model, or in some similar way.
The Ideology of the Path to Liberation
Authors: Cort John E. 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
Outlines the normative Jain ideology of the path to liberation from suffering and rebirth. This path is described as consisting of correct faith, correct knowledge, and correct conduct: faith in, knowledge of, and conduct according to the nine tattvas or ”verities” of Jain metaphysics. Normative conduct also revolves around the person taking the twelve vows (vrata) of a Jain layperson and then the five great vows (mahavrata) of a world‐renouncing mendicant, who then shapes his or her daily conduct around six obligatory ritual actions (avasyaka). Correct faith also involves confidence in the truth of the Jain teachings as demonstrated in the lives of those liberated souls (both the Tirthankaras or Jinas, who after enlightenment teach the Jain truths to the world, and the siddhas, all other enlightened and liberated souls) that constitute a Jain definition of ”God.”
Holy Asceticism
Authors: Cort John E. 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
A key aspect of Jain religious practice involves a wide range of activities falling under the rubric of asceticism (tapas). The model ascetic in the Jain tradition is the 24th and final Jina of this time period, Mahavira. Mendicants engage in asceticism that is shaped by their vows (mahavrata) and the obligatory ritual actions (avasyaka). For the laity, asceticism is more a matter of food and diet, in particular, the continual effort to restrict the amount of harm done to living beings in the preparation and consumption of food, emphasizing the cardinal Jain ethical principle of ahimsa (nonharm). Asceticism both advances the Jain person toward the ideological goal of liberation and improves his or her worldly well‐being.
Purple Haze
Authors: Levine Joseph 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
Consciousness presents a problem. There are excellent reasons for believing that materialism, or physicalism, is the correct metaphysical view of our world, yet it is extremely difficult to see how conscious experiences, or qualia, can be incorporated into the materialist framework. Both aspects of the problem are defended. First, a positive argument for materialism is given, with responses to dualist objections. Second, objections are presented to most materialist attempts to explain consciousness – in particular, higher‐order theories, representationalism, and eliminativism. Finally, it is argued that to make genuine progress on this problem we need to delve deeper into the question of our cognitive access to our own experience. Thus the problems of intentionality and consciousness are not as separable as has often been thought.
“Lately Things Don't Seem the Same” The Conceivability Argument
Authors: Levine Joseph 
Published: October 2003

AbstractThe “conceivability argument” for dualism is presented and analyzed in depth. It is argued that in order to derive the possibility of zombies – creatures physically like us but without conscious experience – from their conceivability, certain unwarranted semantic and epistemic doctrines must be accepted. By introducing the idea of a nonascriptive mode of presentation, it is argued that a materialist can consistently allow the conceivability of zombies without admitting their metaphysical possibility.
“Actin' Funny, But I Don't Know Why” The Explanatory Gap
Authors: Levine Joseph 
Published: October 2003

AbstractThe problem of the explanatory gap is introduced. First, a survey of various theories of scientific explanation reveals that deductive inference plays a crucial role in explanation. Then it is argued that the conceivability of zombies, among other things, demonstrates that we cannot explain conscious experience in terms of underlying physical and functional properties. Finally, an objection to the effect that we do not need to explain identity claims is dealt with.
“Don't Know if I'm Comin' Up or Down” Reductive Strategies
Authors: Levine Joseph 
Published: October 2003

Abstract
Various reductive strategies for explaining consciousness are discussed. The problem of subjectivity is distinguished from the problem of qualia, noting that some theories treat one but not the other. Higher‐order theories are then considered and found wanting. Finally, representationalism, both externalist and internalist, is considered and found inadequate as well.
King Josiah of Judah
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractKing Josiah of Judah (ruled 640–609 b.c.e.) is a figure of extraordinary importance for the history of ancient Israel and Judah. According to the biblical narrative, a Torah scroll was discovered during the renovation of the Jerusalem Temple in the eighteenth year of Josiah's reign. This scroll, commonly identified as a form of Deuteronomy, became the basis of an ambitious program of religious reform and national restoration in which Josiah closed down all pagan worship sites throughout the land of Israel, centralized worship at the Jerusalem Temple, and attempted to reunite Israel and Judah as an independent monarchy under the rule of the royal house of David. The narratives concerning Josiah's reign have proved to be pivotal in discussion among biblical scholars, insofar as they have provided the basis for the reconstruction of the history of Israelite/Judean religion and the compositional history of much of the Hebrew Bible. This study reexamines the relevant biblical literature and the archeology evidence concerning the reign of King Josiah of Judah and its impact on ancient Judean thought. It argues that early forms of the book of Deuteronomy, the so‐called Deuteronomistic History (Joshua; Judges; 1–2 Samuel; and 1–2 Kings), and much of the prophetic literature (Isaiah; Hosea; Amos; Micah; Jeremiah; Zephaniah; Nahum; cf. Habakkuk) were written or edited to support King Josiah's reform and to present him as the righteous Davidic monarch, who would realize the divine promise of security for the land and people of Israel. Following the tragic death of Josiah at the hands of the Egyptian Pharaoh Necho at Megiddo in 609 b.c.e., Josiah's program of religious reform and national restoration came to an end as Judah was subjugated first to Egypt and then to Babylon prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 587 b.c.e. The image of Josiah as a righteous Davidic monarch and his program nevertheless continued to influence Israelite/Judean expectations of restoration in the aftermath of the Babylonian exile.
Introduction
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractAlthough much of the Hebrew Bible is shaped to address the historical and theological problems posed by the Babylonian exile of 587 b.c.e., scholars have consistently noted that the program of religious reform and national restoration instituted by King Josiah of Judah (ruled 640–609 b.c.e.) appears to play a substantial role in the composition of the Hebrew Bible's legal, historical, and prophetic books. Nevertheless, scholars have been unable to provide a convincing case for this contention due to the difficulties in establishing appropriate redaction‐critical models for the composition of such generically distinct books. This study employs advances in redaction‐critical theory that call for a synchronic analysis of the present form of the biblical text as the basis for diachronic reconstruction of its compositional history. Although the archeological record indicates that Josiah did not succeed in carrying out his program, analysis of the relevant legal, historical, and prophetic books points to Josiah's efforts to provide an ideologically charged history, prophetic justification, and legal reforms that would support his efforts to reunite all Israel and Judah under his rule.
The Regnal Evaluation of Josiah in 2 Kings 22:1–23:30
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractThe present form of Josiah's regnal account in 2 Kings 22–23 clearly presupposes the death of Josiah insofar as it presents an oracle by the prophetess Huldah that states that Josiah will die before he sees the judgment decreed by YHWH against Jerusalem, Judah, and the house of David. Analysis of this oracle indicates that it is formulated in relation to a similar oracle concerning King Ahab of Israel by the prophet Elijah (1 Kings 21:17–29). Nevertheless, literary tension in the presentation of this oracle and the superlative evaluations of Josiah throughout these chapters concerning his righteousness in following the example of King David and in observing Mosaic Torah indicate that an original narrative concerning Josiah's righteous rule has been reworked to account for his death and the upcoming Babylonian exile.
The Regnal Evaluation of Manasseh in 2 Kings 21:1–18
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractThe present form of 2 Kings 21 in the Deuteronomistic History clearly blames King Manasseh of Judah for the Babylonian exile, insofar as it states that YHWH decided to destroy Jerusalem and the Temple because of his great sins. Prior scholarship contends that this chapter has been redactionally reworked to point to the exile, but has been unable to provide a coherent redaction‐critical analysis of the chapter to support this claim. An analysis of YHWH statements concerning Manasseh points to an interest in settling Israel securely in the land if the people would observe Mosaic Torah. This indicates that the oracle may have originally functioned as Huldah's promise of security to Josiah, but that it has been reworked and placed in its present position to justify the Babylonian exile.
The Critique of Solomon in 1 Kings 1–11 and 2 Samuel 9/11–24
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractBiblical scholarship has struggled with the two‐fold portrayal of Solomon in 1 Kings 1–11, viz., on the one hand, he is lauded for his wisdom and role as builder of the Jerusalem Temple, but on the other hand, he is condemned for his love of foreign women, who led him to idolatry. Scholars are also perplexed by the so‐called Succession Narrative or Court History in 2 Samuel 9/11–24, which portrays David's adulterous affair with Solomon's mother, Bath Sheba, and the deaths of his older sons. An analysis of this material contends that an earlier Hezekian portrayal of Solomon lauded him as a righteous Davidic monarch, but that the Josianic edition of the DtrH emphasized his marriage to foreign women as the cause of his idolatry, which Josiah had to correct. The portrayal of David's adulterous affair with Bath Sheba and the murder of her husband Uriah indicates that Solomon follows in the footsteps of his father in his love for women and his penchant for spilling the blood of his enemies. Altogether, this critical portrayal of both David and Solomon serves the interests of the Josianic edition of the DtrH by portraying Josiah as the true righteous monarch of the house of David.
David, Saul, and the Presentation of the Judges
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractPrior scholarship on the rise of David in 1 Samuel 1–2, Samuel 8 and the period of the Judges in the book of Judges tends to treat each as separate literary entities. An analysis of both of these bodies of literature indicates a common interest in pointing to Davidic interests in the presentation of Israel's origins. The Samuel traditions emphasize YHWH's favor for David as monarch over against Saul, and the book of Judges is organized to emphasize that the Judges from the northern tribes are flawed in comparison to the Judean Othniel. Rather than appendices to the Judges narrative, Judges 17–21 represent the culmination of the book of Judges, insofar as these chapters portray the foundation of the northern temple at Dan by a corrupt man who steals money from his own mother and the outrageous crime of the Benjaminites at Gibeah, Saul's home town, in raping and murdering a Judean Levite's concubine. These narratives were written to justify the Hezekian edition's contention that the house of David should rule all Israel, and they later functioned as part of the Josianic and Exilic editions of the DtrH.
Zephaniah
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractAlthough many scholars maintain that the book of Zephaniah shows evidence of considerable editing during the postexilic period, a form‐critical analysis of the structure of the book indicates that it was written to support Josiah's reform. Zephaniah is formulated as a prophetic exhortation to seek YHWH. It employs the threat of punishment to motivate its audience to reject pagan worship, and it points to the downfall of Judah's primary enemies to emphasize that YHWH was already beginning to act. Zephaniah's portrayal of Jerusalem's restoration points to Josiah's efforts to reunite Israel and Judah around the Jerusalem Temple.
Nahum
Authors: Sweeney Marvin A. 
Published: October 2003

AbstractMost scholars tend to overlook Nahum because of its purportedly vengeful spirit, but the book is designed to celebrate the downfall of the city of Nineveh in 612 b.c.e. Because Nineveh was the capital of the Assyrian empire that had subjugated Judah for approximately a century prior to Josiah's reign, its downfall was pivotal to Josiah's efforts to reestablish Israelite/Judean independence. An analysis of the structure of the book indicates that Nahum is formulated as a prophetic refutation speech that is designed to convince its audience of YHWH's role in bringing down the Assyrian oppressor.