Claudia Setzer- Abstract, Journal of Early Christiany Studies 2004

8/13/2019 Claudia Setzer- Abstract, Journal of Early Christiany Studies 2004

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/claudia-setzer-abstract-journal-of-early-christiany-studies-2004 1/3

Resurrection of the Body in Early Judaism and Early Christianity

(review)

Johnson, Aaron P.

Journal of Early Christian Studies, Volume 14, Number 2, Summer

2006, pp. 235-236 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press

DOI: 10.1353/earl.2006.0037

For additional information about this article

Access Provided by Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preussischer Kulturbesitz at 06/28/12 12:37PM GMT

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/earl/summary/v014/14.2johnson.html





Claudia SetzerResurrection of the Body in Early Judaism andEarly Christianity Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004Pp. xii + 191. $124.

For most of the inhabitants of the Mediterranean world familiar with the phi-losopher’s rejection of the body as a prison and a tomb for the soul, the beliefin the resurrection of the body would have been peculiar, if not troubling. Theoddness of bodily resurrection was not lost on Christians, who with variousnuances, metaphors, and aims actively sought to theorize and defend such ashibboleth. The struggles of early Christians to articulate and secure a belief in

the resurrection of the body has attracted substantial attention among modernscholars, but the ways in which bodily resurrection could be manipulated tomark off insiders from outsiders and function as “a symbol in the constructionof community” (4) while conferring legitimacy on its espousers have awaited thetreatment of Claudia Setzer’s Resurrection of the Body. In the Jewish context,the belief had functioned for Jews as “part of an effective strategy to solve someproblems created by their subjection to Rome” (47) such as taxation and eco-nomic deprivation. The doctrine solved the problem of subjection by evincingGod’s favor for his people, his judgment against the oppressors, and the bodily

restoration of those who had suffered bodily (50).The first Christians turned to the resurrection of the body for similar reasons

(though, at least to this reviewer, the Platonic theory of the immortality of thesoul and future judgment, expressed, e.g., at Plato, Rep. 10 or Cicero, Rep. 6,would have solved the problem equally well). Seeing 1 Corinthians as an openchallenge to the might of Rome, Setzer regards the fifteenth chapter of this let-ter (the locus classicus for belief in resurrection of the dead) as the climax of ananti-imperial program that both envisions Christian victory over the powers ofthe age and overturns the accepted hierarchy of spirit over body (56–66). Paul’s

bold declarations in this epistle would be adopted as unproblematic by Ignatius ofAntioch and were given no small push towards becoming “a litmus test for whobelonged in the community” (73) by the author of 2 Clement and Polycarp.

It would remain for Christian apologists to establish more solidly and extensivelythe doctrine of bodily resurrection as a fundamental tool of defining Christianidentity, drawing communal boundaries and legitimizing the authority claimed

Book Reviews

Journal of Early Christian Studies 14:2, 235–252 © 2006 The Johns Hopkins University Press



236 JOURNAL OF EARLY CHRISTIAN STUDIES

for its proponents (74–98, 125–43). Justin Martyr declared belief in bodilyresurrection as definitive of “straight-thinking Christians” (dial. 80.5), and hedenied the legitimacy of the title “Christian” for heretical groups who rejectedthe belief. The doctrine of resurrection is here directed not against outsiders (the Jews) but against rival claimants to Christian identity.

Setzer contends that boundary-drawing between Christianity and either Judaismor Greek thought ceased to be a significant feature of the discourse on resurrectionin the apologists, for the apologetic task was by its very nature aimed at build-ing bridges, not drawing boundaries. Apologists like Athenagoras, “provided arationale for Christian theologians to accommodate Greco-Roman society” (96),a point exhibited in the heightened use of Greco-Roman rhetoric in the defenseof resurrection offered by the apologists (especially Irenaeus, 126–31, and Ter-tullian, 133–38). Whereas the rabbinic sources had highlighted difference, theChristians highlighted sameness (147). Also, by emphasizing a doctrinal issue theapologists would have further heightened the appeal of Christianity to outsiderssince it was easier to convert to a set of beliefs than to a way of life with strictethical demands (134–35, 149–50).

Setzer’s denial of boundary-forming mechanisms in the apologetic literature isan unfortunate move in an otherwise illuminating and fruitful approach to bodilyresurrection in early Christian discourse. The apologists’ struggles to clarify anddefend resurrection, flying in the face of sensible Greek thought, could scarcelyhave built much of a bridge with inheritors of Greek paideia in the second cen-

tury (such as Celsus or Caecilius, 99–108). The stereotypical representation ofapologetics as a project of accommodation is largely unhelpful in attempting tocome to grips with the writings of the apologists. In spite of her own declarationsSetzer’s discussion points in the opposite direction: apologetics was fundamen-tally engaged in drawing boundaries between a Christian “us” and a Greek (notmerely heterodox) “them.” Acknowledging the possibility of anti-Greek boundaryformation in apologetic literature prompts us to turn to other passages of equalimport for the conception of bodily resurrection (e.g., Justin’s critique of Plato’saccount of the immateriality of the soul, dial . 1.4).

In sum, the emphasis on community formation and boundary-drawing inthe earlier literature marks Setzer’s main contribution. An appendix on Gnosticliterature and an anomalously placed chapter on material evidence further illu-minate the broader context within which the more mainstream Christian authorsdiscussed above should be appreciated.

Aaron P. Johnson, University of Texas at Austin

Documents

Claudia Setzer- Abstract, Journal of Early Christiany Studies 2004