Mark G. Brett - Böcker

The Hebrew Bible is hardly what might be called a "unified" account of the national history of Israel. The texts, with their myriad genres and competing perspectives, show the forming and re-forming of Ancient Israel's social body in a number of geographical settings. The communities are shown in and out of political power. We read about in-fighting and peace, good kings and bad, freedom and subjugation. Ultimately, the Hebrew Bible is a text about nationhood and empire in the ancient world.Critical reflection on the intersections of religious and political life -- which includes such topics as sovereignty, leadership, law, peoplehood, hospitality, redemption, creation, and eschatology -- can be broadly termed "Political Theology." In Locations of God, Mark G. Brett focuses primarily on the historical books of the Bible, comparing them with selected prophetic and wisdom books, setting all of them against the lived realities under the shadow of successive empires. Brett suggests that national ideas and their imperial alternatives were woven into the biblical traditions by authors who enjoyed very little in the way of political sovereignty. Using political theology to motivate the discussion, Brett shows us just how the earthly situation of ancient Israel contributed to its theology as reflected in the Hebrew Bible.

A Christian imagination of colonial discovery permeated the early modern world, but legal histories developed in very different ways depending on imperial jurisdictions. Indigenous Rights and the Legacies of the Bible: From Moses to Mabo explores the contradictions and ironies that emerged in the interactions between biblical warrants and colonial theories of Indigenous natural rights. The early debates in the Americas mutated in the British colonies with a range of different outcomes after the American Revolution, and tracking the history of biblical interpretation provides an illuminating pathway through these historical complexities.A ground-breaking legal judgement in the High Court of Australia, Mabo v. Queensland (1992), demonstrates the enduring legacies of debates over the previous five centuries. The case reveals that the Australian colonies are the only jurisdiction of the English common law tradition within which no treaties were made with the First Nations. Instead, there is a peculiar development of terra nullius ideology, which can be traced back to the historic influences of the book of Genesis in Puritan thought in the seventeenth century. Having identified both similarities and differences between various colonial arguments, and their overt dependence on early modern theological reasoning, Mark G. Brett examines the paradoxical permutations of imperial and anti-imperial motifs in the biblical texts themselves.Concepts of rights shifted over the centuries from theological to secular frameworks, and more recently, from anthropocentric assumptions to ecologically embedded concepts of Indigenous rights and responsibilities. Bearing in mind the differences between ancient and modern notions of indigeneity, a fresh understanding of this history proves timely as settler colonial states reflect on the implications of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007). Brett's illuminating insights in this detailed study are particularly relevant for the four states that initially voted against the Declaration: the USA, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.

Combining insights from social and literary theory as well as traditional historical studies, Mark Brett argues that the first book of the Bible can be read as resistance literature.Placing the theological text firmly within its socio-political context, he shows that the editors of Genesis were directly engaged with contemporary issues, especially the nature of an authentic community, and that the book was designed to undermine the ethnocentism of the imperial governors of the Persian period (fifth century BCE).

Combining insights from social and literary theory as well as traditional historical studies, Mark Brett argues that the first book of the Bible can be read as resistance literature.Placing the theological text firmly within its socio-political context, he shows that the editors of Genesis were directly engaged with contemporary issues, especially the nature of an authentic community, and that the book was designed to undermine the ethnocentism of the imperial governors of the Persian period (fifth century BCE).

This book suggests that Old Testament scholars should strengthen their growing links with neighbouring academic disciplines and encourage a number of interpretative interests within biblical studies. Given such a pluralistic context, the author's contention is that the 'canonical' approach to Old Testament study will have a distinctive contribution to make to the discipline without necessarily displacing other traditions of historical and literary inquiry, as many scholars have assumed. Dr Brett offers a comprehensive critique of the canonical approach as developed by Brevard Childs, and examines the development of Childs's exegetical practice, his hermeneutical theory, and the many critical responses which his work has elicited. In responding to these criticisms, the author examines the most problematic aspects of the canonical approach (notably Childs's inadequate reply to those who emphasize the ideological conflicts that lie behind biblical texts in their final form) and seeks to reconstruct the approach in light of contemporary discussions of interpretation in literary theory and the social sciences.

This book suggests that Old Testament scholars should strengthen their growing links with neighbouring academic disciplines and encourage a number of interpretative interests within biblical studies. Given such a pluralistic context, the author's contention is that the 'canonical' approach to Old Testament study will have a distinctive contribution to make to the discipline without necessarily displacing other traditions of historical and literary inquiry, as many scholars have assumed. Dr Brett offers a comprehensive critique of the canonical approach as developed by Brevard Childs, and examines the development of Childs's exegetical practice, his hermeneutical theory, and the many critical responses which his work has elicited. In responding to these criticisms, the author examines the most problematic aspects of the canonical approach (notably Childs's inadequate reply to those who emphasize the ideological conflicts that lie behind biblical texts in their final form) and seeks to reconstruct the approach in light of contemporary discussions of interpretation in literary theory and the social sciences.