Doctoral Colloquium – Wednesday, September 4th
Go back to overview page Doctoral Colloquium 2024
| 7:30 – 8:00 | Breakfast |
| 8:15 – 8:45 | Chapel (E. Dittmann) |
| 09:00 – 09:45 | Student Presentations J. Stephen Balaraj (RM) at room LCCS 0103 | Go to abstract M. Vuolteenaho (OT/NT) at room LCCS 0102 | Go to abstract P. Wijnberger (HT) at room LCCS 0104 | Go to abstract |
| 09:50 – 10:35 | Student Presentations B. Adamo (HT) at room LCCS 0101 | Go to abstract J. Sherrill (OT) at room LCCS 0104 | Go to abstract G. van Velzen (ST) at room LCCS 0102 | Go to abstract |
| 10:35 – 11:05 | Coffee Break |
| 11:05 – 11:50 | Student Presentations C. Dimitrova (ST) at room LCCS 0104 | Go to abstract M.J. Luteyn (OT) at room LCCS 0102 | Go to abstract H. Thamrindinata (HT) at room LCCS 0103 | Go to abstract |
| 12:00 – 13:00 | Faculty Presentations
A. Baum (NT) at room LCCS 0101 M. Zehnder (OT) at room LCCS 0102 |
| 13:00 – 14:00 | Lunch |
| 14:00 – 14:30 | Colloquium Photo Session (dining hall) |
| 14:00 – 16:00 | Doctoral Examination (closed meetings) G. van Velzen |
| Possibility for appointments | |
| 16:00 – 16:30 | Coffee Break |
| 16:30 – 18:00 | Meeting Candidate Promovendi 2024-2025 at room LCCS 0103 |
| Workshop at room LCCS 0102 “Dealing with difficulties in the writing process” by Arjenne Louter of the The Dutch PhD Coach |
|
| 18:00 – 21:30 | Faculty & Students Formal Dinner at “De Oude Kantien”, Kantineplein 3, 3001 Leuven (Heverlee) |
| 21:30 | Leuven by night (free time) |
< Go back to Tuesday, September 3rd | Go to Thursday, September 5th >
Abstracts
Student Presentations
J. Stephen Balaraj (RM): Charisms of the Holy Spirit in the sixth phase the international roman catholic – classical pentecostal dialogue: our common ground
The paper examines the theological dimensions of the introductory segment and the first section (§§1-28) of the Final Report from the sixth phase (FR VI) of the International Roman Catholic Classical Pentecostal Dialogue (IRCCPD). The dialogue focuses on the shared (un)common grounds of the charisms of the Holy Spirit within both Roman Catholic and Pentecostal traditions. The central argument posits that the sixth phase of the IRCCPD provides a comprehensive theological exploration of the understanding of charisms by both traditions. It analyzes their historical continuity, considers their dual nature as both charismatic gifts and institutional elements, investigates their reception and availability, and explores their relationship to Christian suffering. Through a thematic-theological analysis of the first section of the final report, the paper provides deeper insights into the theological perspectives, agreements and differences between these two traditions regarding the Holy Spirit’s charisms.
M. Vuolteenaho (OT/NT): Sons of God, Prophesying and Interpretation of Scripture in the NT and Early Judaism. Case Study of 1 Cor. 14 and John 10:33b-38
In the Second Temple Judaism interpretation of Scripture was considered revelation or prophecy from God. This is attested both in the Qumranic and Rabbinic literature. Likewise Paul, a Second Temple Jew, interprets OT scripture in his letters, which form NT revelation of God. While giving instructions for prophesying in the congregation in 1 Cor. 14, he alludes to a revelation with the two rhetorical questions in verse 36 pointing to an interpretation of Scripture in the text above. Strict purity practices were followed in the Qumran assembly of the holy ones for them to be able to commune with heavenly angels for receiving new revelation. In Rabbinic texts, the OT prophets, who were called sons of God, were deemed to take part in the heavenly assembly. There they received divine revelation and were sent to proclaim it to the Israelites. The same concept is evidenced throughout the Gospel of John. Jesus, the Word become flesh, came to the world from God, sent by God (John 1:1, 9, 11, 14 & 10:36, etc.). In John 10:34 Jesus references the assembly of the sons of God in Ps. 82:6 in defence of him being a son of God.
P. Wijnberger (HT): Knowing God inside out
The title of this presentation may seem pretentious. Who can know God inside out? Is that not the epitome of arrogance? To address this question, shall turn to Franciscus Junius in the 16th century. Driven by theological humility, Junius reintroduced a pivotal distinction in Early Modern Theology as a foundational approach to theological reflection. This distinction differentiates between the theology of God knowing Himself and revealed theology. My research, titled: “The Distinction of Archetypal and Ectypal Theology and its Impact on Theology: Franciscus Junius (1545-1602), Petrus van Mastricht (1630-1706), and Bernhardinus de Moor (1709-1780),” focuses on this distinction.
In the presentation, I will introduce my research on the development and impact of this distinction. Firstly, I will provide background by elucidating some key elements of the Scholastic method. Secondly, I will outline the development of this distinction, tracing its origins, Junius’s reintroduction of it, and its influence on dogmatics in Early Modern Theology. Finally, I will present two examples of the impact of this distinction on dogmatics from Junius’s “De vera theologia.”
B. Adamo (HT): Incarnation as continuous communication? A comparative analysis of the hypostatic union in the theologies of Petrus van Mastricht (1630-1706) and Jonathan Edwards (1703-58)
Many Jonathan Edwards scholars have rightly sought to interpret Edwards’s Christology through the lens of his Reformed heritage, which has included comparisons with William Ames (1576-1633), Francis Turretin (1623-87), and John Owen (1616-83). This paper will seek to compare Edwards’s Christology, and specifically his doctrine of the hypostatic union, with one of his favourite Reformed theological predecessors, Petrus van Mastricht. In doing so, this paper will seek to discern not only the similarities, but also the dissimilarities, between Mastricht and Edwards. It will stress the importance of exploring their different understandings of the role of the Holy Spirit with respect to the union, as well as different understandings of key metaphysical concepts such as personhood, substance, identity, consciousness, and what constitutes union in general.
J. Sherrill (OT): Hebrew Diachrony and the Doctrine of Scripture – Status Quaestionis
In the early twentieth century, scholars of biblical archaeology and epigraphy began to recognize what they deemed an archaic phase of the Hebrew language that plausibly evinced an earlier dating of many biblical texts than the dates assigned to them by critical scholars. Debate intensified in the 1990s alongside the “minimalist-maximalist” controversy, but while the latter faded, debate has persisted for the last two decades over the appropriate application of historical linguistics to biblical Hebrew and the dating of texts. While a now-standard periodization has prevailed in major publications, many challenges have also seriously qualified the confidence with which such a model should be assumed and applied, and others have brought to light alternative and/or complementary models for interpreting the data. The fact that some diachronic change obtained in Hebrew during the biblical period is beyond dispute. Yet, whether or not the prevailing model is accurate, integration of the fact of linguistic diachrony with the biblical self-witness is wanting, as is integration with the doctrine of Scripture within Reformed and evangelical scholarship. The latter especially regards inspiration, canonization, authenticity, historicity, and authority.
This paper will overview the various issues in Hebrew diachrony, its relevance for the doctrine of Scripture, and a path forward for research at the intersection of the two subjects.
G. van Velzen (NT): In what way can Iris Murdoch’s philosophy be helpful to theologians, especially ethicists?
According to Iris Murdoch, humans are constantly ‘paying attention’ in life to ‘facts and values’. This is because ‘consciousness’ has a primal need for value. Ideally, this is how people search for ‘the good’. For Murdoch, the good is not automatically a personal God. She thinks strictly philosophically, and in her case platonically. Man lives through consciousness. However, he is not prepared in advance to do good; rather, he is evil. In ‘The Sovereignty of the Good’ Murdoch even says: “the human being is to break the fat relentless ego”. The only way this works is: paying attention through intentional love. For theologians, a fruitful conversation with Murdoch may arise here. Doesn’t theology need full participation of the role of consciousness in action at this very moment? She elaborates on this practically by developing a vocabulary similar to praying; she shuttles in consciousness between the good and her own thoughts and feelings in a reflexive way. This use of language is particularly common in her many novels. In this respect it is also interesting for ethicists that she searches for a truly normative ethics. Beyond the non-committal by always desiring only the good. Thus, she develops an engaging broad ethics.
C. Dimitrova (ST): Business as Mission (BAM) as an Agent of Peace: Miscellaneous Insights into “Happiness,” “Material Prosperity,” and “Peace”
Modern economics, following in the footsteps of Adam Smith, is founded upon the premise that human happiness is contingent upon material growth and an improved quality of life. In addition, it is presumed that the attainment of human flourishing would diminish the probability of conflict and social disorder. But does happiness depend solely on economic growth? If so, does material prosperity necessarily lead to greater peace and justice in the world? Theological anthropology has been a valuable resource within Christian traditions for challenging a purely material approach to human development, redefined not as an end conditioned by external goods, but as a by-product of moral and spiritual growth. Conversely, the Genesis narrative on human nature challenges an overly optimistic approach to human morality with a realistic assessment of the limits, and possibilities of a humanity genuinely transformed to work for the common good. The Wesleyan Methodist tradition offers a valuable perspective in this regard, examining human needs from a comprehensive standpoint that bridges the gap between theological approaches to development and those pertaining to mission. In this context, Business as Mission (BAM) represents a contemporary attempt to promote human development through the pursuit of holistic personal and social transformation based on the redemptive potential of business.
M.J. Luteyn (OT): Refuge in or out of Egypt: An Intertextual Reading of the Cities of Refuge, 1 Kings 11, and Matthew 2
The theme of flight is one of the most well-established patterns in biblical literature. Almost all of its notable figures flee: Abram, Joseph, Moses, David, Jesus, Paul, and many others. Furthermore, two of the main themes of the Old Testament feature a flight: Jacob’s family to Egypt and Israel’s return under Moses (Exodus), and the Babylonian deportation and eventual return under Ezra and Nehemiah (Exile).
In this presentation, I first define the nature of intertextual or typological patterns. The most critical aspect in establishing these patterns is the correspondence of both facts and significance between different texts. Or in other words, a correspondence both on the literal and the theological level. Second, I reanalyse the biblical pattern of flight and review recent literature on this topic. On one hand, I provide a critical overview of the correspondence of facts, such as common sentences, sequences, and structures. On the other hand, the correspondence of significance prompts some exegetical remarks on three separate but interrelated case studies: asylum in Exodus-Deuteronomy, Solomon’s adversaries in 1 Kings 11, and Jesus’ flight in Matthew 2.
This contributes to existing exegesis on the cities of refuge by highlighting fresh relationships between some lesser-studied passages. The exegetical value of this case study lies in demonstrating how features of these passages, often noted in isolation, fit into the broader picture of the biblical pattern of flight, while accommodating both their common and unique aspects.
H. Thamrindinata (HT): Gisbertus Voetius (1589-1676) on the Adoration of Christ (adoratio Christi)
The question of the adoratio Christi became controversial at the Academy of Franeker when William Ames (1576-1633) defended the thesis in 1631 that Christ should be worshipped as Mediator in both his divine and human natures. This thesis was challenged by Johannes Maccovius (1588-1644), who defended the idea that Christ was to be worshipped only as God in His divine nature. The controversy attracted the attention of theologians from other academies in the Netherlands and led them to take sides. But the root of this controversy goes deeper than this dispute among Reformed theologians in the Netherlands. It was discussed by Aquinas in the Summa theologica and disputed by the Ubiquitarians, Socinians and Remonstrants. As one of the disputants in the Ames-Maccovian controversy on the adoratio Christi, Gisbertus Voetius (1589-1676) discussed this topic in his Selectae disputationes theologicarum pars prima, pp. 520-552 with the defendant Florentius Michaelidus of Arnemuiden-Zeeland on 21 and 28 April 1638. This presentation will present Voetius’ view of the aforementioned disputation.
Faculty presentations
A. Baum (NT): Where Do the Persistent Disagreements between German-Speaking and English-Speaking Biblical Scholarship Come From?
While the great majority of German-speaking exegetes regard 2 Thessalonians as post-Pauline, an equally large majority of English-speaking exegetes consider it to be Pauline. Why does this disagreement run along a language boundary? This question can only be answered from an interdisciplinary perspective by considering insights from the sociology of science: Scholarly judgements are not a purely binary process between exegetes and the objects of their investigations; they are strongly influenced by the scholarly environment in which they work. Exegetes go not only “where the evidence leads them,” but also where the research community to which they belong leads them. Ideally, a heightened awareness of the social contexts that affect every biblical scholar can lend greater weight to historical and exegetical arguments in international dialogue.
M. Zehnder (OT): The Parable of the Good Samaritan: An Old Testament Ethics Perspective
The majority of contemporary interpreters holds the view that the main focus of the parable of the Good Samaritan is on ethics, particularly the demand of showing love/compassion in practical ways to persons who do not share one’s own ethnic and religious background. According to a more specific line of interpretation, the parable suggests that Jesus (or the author of this text) advocates for open-border policies in the current migration debate.
This paper attempts to explain that while the ethical line of understanding in terms of a broad request for neighborly love is adequate, the specific argument for an open-border interpretation is misplaced. In a second step, the question will be addressed whether other texts in the Old or New Testament might be better suited to promote the concept of open borders.