Papers by Frederik Mulder
Evangelical Quarterly 92, 2021
Internal debates about orthodoxy and unorthodoxy inside the Church of England have been going on ... more Internal debates about orthodoxy and unorthodoxy inside the Church of England have been going on for centuries. The new contribution this article hopes to make is to provide an outsider's view of these issues which will incorporate personal experiences, historical analyses, doctrinal developments, and diversifications, reflecting on three test cases, engagement with recent voices, and finally, retrospective reflection on key biblical texts which suggest that faithfulness to Scripture should lead to realignment from a dividing Church of England.
The English Churchman, 2019
In his contribution to a public conversation held at University Church, Oxford, in December 2014,... more In his contribution to a public conversation held at University Church, Oxford, in December 2014, Sir Diarmaid MacCulloch mentioned a case of an African homosexual being “brutally attacked” by a mob of men and rushed to hospital for medical attention. Bishops from the Anglican communion, he claimed, are encouraging this “work of hatred” and are “soft pedalling on the homophobic alliance” of conservative African Christians. It is time, he contends, for Bishops to be liberated from their “unthinking conservatism”. This column for The English Churchman (31/05/2019), attempts to answer MacCulloch by reflecting on probably the greatest Victorian Coloniser, Cecil Rhodes.
Abstract:
Claiming to stand on the shoulders of the later Origen, in Gospel Writing: A Canonical... more Abstract:
Claiming to stand on the shoulders of the later Origen, in Gospel Writing: A Canonical Perspective, Francis B. Watson makes a compelling case that all attempts to address alleged contradictions and establishing historical truth in and between the four canonical Gospels must be abandoned. Watson proposes that the later Origen’s preference for deeper spiritual and theological truth, in the wake of alleged empirical falsehood, should be embraced as a new paradigm and more ‘comprehensive approach’, subverting and destroying previous approaches. In this article, I test Watson’s relevant interpretations of Origen, focusing on his Commentary on John, Book 10 (Comm. Jo.); Against Celsus (Cels.); and On First Principles (Princ.). In addition, I offer evidence challenging Watson’s claim that the later Origen’s return to addressing some contradictions and establishing historical truth in Cels. reflects popular apologetics for the wider public, in contrast to more radical thoughts on hermeneutics in Book 10 of his Comm. Jo. It is argued that a more comprehensive and persuasive understanding of Origen’s approach to gospel differences and historicity, requires a close reading of his early and later treatises, resulting in a nuanced middle position.
In this paper, I analyse and compare aspects of the Epistle of Rheginos (a letter from the Nag Ha... more In this paper, I analyse and compare aspects of the Epistle of Rheginos (a letter from the Nag Hammadi collection) and Paul’s understanding of (1) the resurrection body, and (2) eschatology. Rheginos presents us with a highly skilful articulation of important Pauline themes. Within the context of the canonical Pauline Epistles as a whole however, Rheginos has moved beyond what Paul would have allowed for. As for the notion that the author of the Epistle to Rheginos is Paul’s faithful servant, at the very least, several questions and ambiguities remain.
In the years following the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth, a group of people who claimed to be ... more In the years following the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth, a group of people who claimed to be his followers, later to be called Christians, established the Christian church. When asked why this happened, they often responded with the claim that Jesus was raised from the dead despite the fact that it initially would have sounded just as surprising and unlikely to Jews and Gentiles alike. These followers of Jesus seem stubbornly to have persisted with their claims, expecting to be taken seriously and even appealing to named eyewitnesses. But why were these claims made? What did they mean? Why did these Christians stubbornly persist with them? What actually happened to Jesus of Nazareth? (pp. 3-4) Answering these questions form the heart of Christopher Bryans' 432 pages, 937 endnote volume: The Resurrection of the Messiah. Bryan covers Second Temple Judaism, the Greco-Roman world (with e.g. interesting discussions about the legend of Alcestis), 1 Corinthians 15 and the four canonical gospels to answer these questions. Following this, he discusses five modern objections/ alternative explanations to the claim that Jesus rose from the grave in a transformed body, claiming to debunk all of them (especially the views of Bultmann, Borg, Crossan, and Lüdemann), followed by the implications of Jesus' resurrection. The main contributions of this work are probably: i) the way in which it makes serious and often technical scholarship more digestible for the relatively uninformed reader; ii) some kind of middle ground position somewhere between the likes of Richard Bauckham and N.T. Wright on the one hand, and others like David Catchpole and C.H. Dodd on the other; iii) his academic rigor in the extensive endnotes (a full 146 pages!); iv) and also his creative and constant interaction with Anglo-Catholic liturgy, Reformed music, and poetry.
This thesis tests the claims that a reception history approach within New Testament studies can a... more This thesis tests the claims that a reception history approach within New Testament studies can assist in i) evaluating and judging interpretations; ii) identifying unresolved problems; iii) asking fresh, new, penetrating questions, and ultimately; iv) providing the materials that help us journey on the continuous quest for theological truth.
Uploads
Papers by Frederik Mulder
Claiming to stand on the shoulders of the later Origen, in Gospel Writing: A Canonical Perspective, Francis B. Watson makes a compelling case that all attempts to address alleged contradictions and establishing historical truth in and between the four canonical Gospels must be abandoned. Watson proposes that the later Origen’s preference for deeper spiritual and theological truth, in the wake of alleged empirical falsehood, should be embraced as a new paradigm and more ‘comprehensive approach’, subverting and destroying previous approaches. In this article, I test Watson’s relevant interpretations of Origen, focusing on his Commentary on John, Book 10 (Comm. Jo.); Against Celsus (Cels.); and On First Principles (Princ.). In addition, I offer evidence challenging Watson’s claim that the later Origen’s return to addressing some contradictions and establishing historical truth in Cels. reflects popular apologetics for the wider public, in contrast to more radical thoughts on hermeneutics in Book 10 of his Comm. Jo. It is argued that a more comprehensive and persuasive understanding of Origen’s approach to gospel differences and historicity, requires a close reading of his early and later treatises, resulting in a nuanced middle position.