Elements of Supersessionism from Postcolonial Biblical Criticism in Luke-Acts

Sammanfattning

For roughly two millennia supersessionism was the established interpretative framework for Christian theology. Likewise, in the past decades, postcolonial theory has become the de facto paradigm liberal leaning politicians and academics use to evaluate problems of inequality in societies. There remains very little critique of its problem-solving applicability in the political sphere and, even less critique in biblical studies. An alternative to postcolonial biblical criticism, post-supersessionism may seem to conflict with the interpretative outcomes which the former proposes. This thesis is a critique of postcolonial biblical criticism and its use of supersessionist interpretations in Luke-Acts. Jason F. Moraff has found previous attempts to identify supersessionism from biblical exegesis have proven unsuccessful due to inadequate definitive parameters. This thesis proposes postcolonial biblical criticism could be considered supersessionist in its exegesis of Luke-Acts by implementing well defined limiting factors. A conditional comparative method of the postcolonial exegetical framework in Luke-Acts is cross referenced with defined categories of supersessionism instituted by David Novak, Kendall R. Soulen, and Terence L. Donaldson. The results of this thesis have found supersessionist interpretations and categories of supersessionism within a postcolonial biblical framework. Discussion of the results proposes lack of awareness of the post- supersessionist hermeneutic as well as reflections derived from Walter Lowe and R. S. Sugirtharajah.