“THE TRANSFORMING PRAXIS TOWARD ECCLESIOGENESIS, Church Rebirth” (Chapter Two)

1. Reasons for Misusing the Bible

The Bible teaches how God created humankind in His own image, how eternal life is attained, and that there is no room for racial superiority in the Christian community. Then why do many people claim—out of prejudice—that intercultural families are not biblical?

Many of those who oppose intercultural marriage assert, without substantial support, that the Bible forbids it. Their opposition typically lacks valid biblical foundation, and it is unlikely that they will find definitive evidence in the future. Some cite Nehemiah 13:25, where Nehemiah rebukes the Israelites: “I rebuked them and called curses down on them. I beat some of the men and pulled out their hair. I made them take an oath in God’s name and said: ‘You are not to give your daughters in marriage to their sons, nor are you to take their daughters in marriage for your sons or for yourselves.’”

Lewis Arthur addresses this passage by explaining that a proper analysis of ancient Israelite laws and the actual practice of intercultural marriage leads to the conclusion that the Bible does not forbid or condemn marriage between different races. Rather, it prohibits idolatry and unions with nonbelievers. Anyone who approaches the Bible with an open heart can clearly see that racially exclusive interpretations of Scripture are unjustified and unfounded.

Some who oppose intercultural marriage base their justification on creation before Adam. For instance, the Lord’s Covenant Church interprets Genesis 1:11 to oppose such unions. They claim that the phrase “according to their kinds” refers to God’s intention to keep races separate—believing that racial purity, particularly among white people, is divinely mandated. Others refer to Deuteronomy 22:9, which says, “Do not plant two kinds of seed in your vineyard; if you do, not only the crops you plant but also the fruit of the vineyard will be defiled.”

These passages, cited in opposition to intercultural marriage based on the idea of “two kinds of seed,” are not about human beings at all, but rather pertain to creation before Adam. The Bible consistently teaches that all humanity shares a single origin. Any theory of polygenism (the belief that different races have different origins) must be rejected for a truly biblical interpretation.

Genesis 9:18–27 is another commonly cited passage used to oppose intercultural marriage. It records how Noah’s son Ham saw his father’s nakedness, and Noah cursed Ham’s son Canaan, saying, “Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.” Shem and Japheth were then blessed. Some interpret this passage to support racial hierarchy, claiming that Noah’s three sons represent the three major races: Black, Asian, and White. However, this is a gross misinterpretation that must be addressed.

First, it was not Ham but Canaan who was cursed. This distinction is often overlooked. Were the Canaanites Black? According to William F. Albright, Genesis 10:15–19 indicates that the descendants of Canaan were not Africans and were not regarded as Black by ancient societies. Rather, the curse on Canaan can best be understood as a prophetic statement. The Hebrews did eventually conquer the Canaanites, fulfilling this “curse.” Ironically, among all ethnic groups, the Canaanites most closely resemble Caucasians.

Furthermore, Noah is not God. Therefore, interpreting this curse as a divine condemnation of a particular race is a serious error. There is no mention of skin color in the text, and nothing suggests that the curse resulted in any physical or racial transformation. Connecting this passage to modern racial ideologies is entirely unfounded.

2. Biblical Interpretation of Intercultural Marriage

What, then, does the Bible teach about intercultural marriage? It proclaims unity and equality in God’s creation. Acts 17:24, 26 states, “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands… From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.”

The prophet Malachi also affirms the unity of humankind with rhetorical questions: “Have we not all one Father? Did not one God create us?” (Malachi 2:10). Biblically speaking, there is no difference in the origins of humankind before and after the creation of Adam.

Numbers 12:1–6 provides another instructive case. Miriam and Aaron criticize Moses for marrying a Cushite woman. Cush was the first son of Ham and often represented people from the southern regions. God rebukes Miriam and Aaron for their opposition to Moses’ intercultural marriage, demonstrating divine disapproval of their prejudice.

Two other significant examples are the marriages of Rahab (a Canaanite woman) and Ruth (a Moabite woman) to Israelite men. Some argue that the blessings these women received were due to their faith, not their marriages. While this is an interesting perspective, Matthew 1:5 records both Rahab and Ruth in the genealogy of Jesus Christ, indicating that the Bible honors them and their unions.

3. Self-Centered Biblical Interpretation

Why do some Christians use the Bible to justify racism? Racial prejudice stems from a worldview in which one’s own group is seen as superior. This self-centered view often arises from the sin of pride. Yet the Bible clearly teaches that all people are created equally in God’s image.

Another reason for such attitudes is a misunderstanding of divine election. People assume that God’s choice of certain nations or individuals implies their superiority. However, this doctrine is not based on human merit but solely on God’s omnipotence and grace.

Misinterpretations of Scripture have enabled racists to use the Bible as a wall of defense. This misuse has made the Bible one of the most misquoted texts in the world.

4. Biblical Foundations for an Open Interpretation

God’s creation includes an openness to the future. If any organism or society is closed off from change, it is doomed to perish. According to Professor Kyun-Jin Kim, openness involves the following principles:

1. Acknowledgment of one’s incompleteness
2. Recognition of one’s imperfection
3. Acceptance of one’s negativity (in the Hegelian sense)
4. Openness to historical newness and transformation
5. An awareness of an as-yet-unreached future

In summary, openness assumes that the world is fundamentally historical. Therefore, historical consciousness presupposes openness.

The biblical foundation for openness is found in the doctrine of creation. According to the Priestly source in Genesis 1, God creates the world through His Word. Human beings and the world are distinct from God—they are not divine emanations or mythological expressions of divine essence. Rather, they are created ex nihilo (from nothing) by God’s free will.

As such, both humanity and the world stand before God as distinct beings. This means that openness toward God is a fundamental condition of creation. Human beings are always to live “before God” (coram Deo), in a state of openness to His presence. God is the ever-living One who brings forth newness in the world.

We can identify three expressions of this openness in creation:

1) Exodus-Genesis, Creation through Exodus (창조로서의 출애굽)

The Bible “tells a single story.” Some historians have claimed that humanity began recording history through the biblical narrative. Faith in the Bible means believing in the God who reveals Himself through history. God makes Himself known through His actions. Therefore, from the very beginning, acts—divine actions—are essential for a faith aligned with the biblical narrative. A recurring concept throughout Scripture is that “Yahweh is the living God” (Isaiah 8:19; 1 Kings 17:1; 1 Samuel 17:26–36). He is a God who acts. A God who speaks. This is the God of Israel. In contrast, other gods are mocked: “They have mouths, but cannot speak” (Psalm 115:5). But the word of God is powerful (Isaiah 55:10–11). Yahweh’s word is simultaneously speech and event.

Israel’s confession of faith in God is always tied to historical events. These are the so-called “historical creeds.”

“… Yahweh struck Egypt with a mighty hand and brought us out of it… He brought us out to bring us into the land He promised on oath to our ancestors…” (Deuteronomy 6:20–25).

The Lord liberates the Jewish people from bondage and oppression. He confirms His visible actions through signs. This breakthrough from exploitation can only become true gratitude when the promise is fulfilled. The Jewish people settle in the “land flowing with milk and honey”—the promised land—which now becomes a promise still awaiting future fulfillment. This liberating act of Yahweh becomes the foundation of the identity of the Jewish people. A “righteous life” for this people is bound up with the practice of Yahweh’s commandments:

“My father was a wandering Aramean… Yahweh heard our cry and saw our oppression, toil, and misery… He brought us out of Egypt… and gave us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey.” (Deuteronomy 26:5–9)

Here again, we encounter essentially the same idea. The reference to Jacob (the wandering Aramean) expresses the historical origin and legitimate beginning of the Jewish people. Once again, the focus is on liberation from oppression in Egypt. The God of biblical faith is revealed in the event of liberation. In Amos 2:10 and 3:2, the same “creed” appears in a more concise form. All of them can be summarized as follows:

“Yahweh brought us out of Egypt.”
The God of Israel is the God who rescues and liberates.

The cultural context of these “historical creeds” must also be emphasized. They are composed as confessions of faith framed within a celebration of Yahweh’s acts of liberation. The theme of covenant has not yet appeared. The only foundation, the single historical fact, is liberation from Egypt. The covenant itself is rooted in this act of liberation. Israel’s faith rests upon the history of liberation and the covenant grounded therein.

---

(1) Openness: Exodus as Ongoing Genesis

History that emerges from biblical faith is open-ended—history that is directed toward the future. Liberation from Egypt is not a one-time event, but one that must continuously be re-enacted—a reference point for Yahweh’s future interventions (Psalms 105, 106). The land toward which Yahweh leads His people is the land He promised to their ancestors. However, this land now becomes a re-promised and still-unfulfilled hope—an open promise.

Faith is not transmitted simply by remembering past events. Rather, it is by re-reading past events in the light of the present—through the new promises of Yahweh—that faith is transmitted. Yahweh says, “I am who I am today” (Exodus 3:14). “I am the one who will be in the future. I am the one you must seek.” The God of biblical faith launches faith toward the future. The recognition of Yahweh demands an eschatological posture. God is love—the love of today, fulfilled in the fullness of the end. Hope is an essential element of biblical faith.

Nevertheless, it is not sufficient to say that God reveals Himself in history and that Israel’s faith is embodied in a historical framework. What must be retained is that the God of the Bible is not merely the sovereign over history, but the one who directs history toward the establishment of justice and righteousness. He is more than a providential God. He is the God who sides with the poor and liberates them from bondage and oppression.

To say that Yahweh intervenes in history means precisely this: the goal of His activity is not to demonstrate power for its own sake, but to liberate and establish just governance (Psalm 68:5).

---

(2) Exodus–Genesis: A Story of Origins and Re-creation

It is particularly noteworthy that Israel’s faith confesses Exodus as a new beginning.
The Book of Genesis tells the story of creation. The Book of Exodus tells the story of re-creation.
This narrative structure is not accidental. The Exodus event is not only the moment of liberation for the people of Israel—it is a Genesis event. Exodus is Genesis. Or to put it more clearly: Genesis becomes true only through Exodus.

The world God created in Genesis becomes corrupted by sin, torn by injustice, and distorted by domination. The Egypt of the Exodus narrative is a world where the original creation has been reversed—where human dignity is denied and people are reduced to objects of labor, to slaves under the rule of Pharaoh. God’s act of liberation through Moses is therefore a second Genesis, a decisive intervention to renew creation.

God does not merely create the world once and then step back. Rather, God re-creates the world when it becomes corrupted. And this re-creation happens through acts of liberation, through Exodus. Thus, Exodus is not just a historical event, but an ongoing pattern of divine activity—God’s repeated intervention in history to restore justice and human dignity.

The land that God promises to Israel is not just a geographical territory—it is a symbol of restored creation. The land “flowing with milk and honey” is a world where relationships are healed, justice is practiced, and the shalom of creation is restored. It is a re-Genesis—a beginning again, through grace.

---

(3) Exodus as a Paradigm of Salvation

The Exodus is not only the foundational story of Israel, but it also becomes the paradigm through which Christian faith understands salvation.
In the New Testament, Jesus is portrayed as the new Moses. His death and resurrection are understood as a new Exodus (Luke 9:31 refers to Jesus’ “departure”—in Greek, exodos—which he was about to bring to fulfillment in Jerusalem).

Jesus leads a new liberation—not from Pharaoh, but from the dominion of sin and death. His cross is a confrontation with the powers of injustice, and his resurrection is the beginning of a new creation. This is a radical reinterpretation of the Exodus: from historical event to theological paradigm.

Thus, for Christian theology, Exodus is not only an Old Testament memory but a living pattern of divine action. Wherever people are bound—by sin, injustice, empire, or despair—God acts to liberate. And wherever liberation occurs, there is the beginning of a new creation. Exodus is Genesis.

---

(4) Toward an Open Future: The Eschatological Exodus

The Exodus event, both in Israel’s history and in the Christian Gospel, does not close with arrival—it opens toward the future. The Promised Land is not the end. It is a signpost. Israel’s history in the land is marked by repeated failures to embody justice. The prophets remind Israel that without justice, even the land becomes meaningless (Isaiah 1:10–17; Amos 5:21–24).

The same is true in Christian hope. The resurrection is not merely a return to life—it is the beginning of new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). It is the pledge of a future where all creation will be made new (Revelation 21:1–5).
Thus, Exodus points beyond itself. It is a sign of eschatological hope.

In this way, biblical faith is always both grounded in history and oriented toward the future. It remembers in order to hope. It hopes in order to act. The Exodus-Genesis pattern teaches us that God’s liberating and re-creating work is not finished. It continues—in our time, in our struggles, in our cries for justice.

(5) Cross–Genesis: The Exodus of the Crucified and the Resurrection of Creation

Finally, the Exodus finds its most profound expression in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
In Jesus, the story of Israel reaches its climax. His life is the embodiment of God’s liberating presence. His death is the exposure of empire and the depths of human sin. His resurrection is the dawn of new creation.

The cross is not the end of the Exodus—it is its center. In the death of Jesus, we witness the ultimate form of solidarity with the oppressed. Jesus dies as a slave under Roman power, abandoned and executed as a criminal. This is the deepest descent into the “Egypt” of human history. But precisely there—in that place of suffering and death—God acts again.

The resurrection of Jesus is the new Genesis. It is the Exodus from death itself. Just as Israel passed through the Red Sea into freedom, so Jesus passes through death into new life—and he leads humanity and all creation with him.
This is the Cross–Genesis: the place where the story of liberation and the promise of creation are joined.

Therefore, Christian faith proclaims not only that we have been saved, but that we are being re-created. The resurrection is not a return to what was, but the birth of what has never yet been. It is the eschatological horizon toward which all of history is moving.

The Exodus continues—in every struggle for justice, every cry for liberation, every act of resurrection in the midst of despair. The Cross–Genesis is not merely a past event. It is the praxis of God’s ongoing work in history and in our lives.

2) Cross-Genesis: The Cross as New Creation (창조로서의 십자가)

(1) Liberation of Perception as the Genesis of the Cross

The Bible is historical. Therefore, memory is essential. However, the faith of the Bible is not confined to memory—it is freedom. This freedom is defined by its openness to the future. Recalling Yahweh’s acts of liberation is not a mere nostalgia for the past. Every great love cherishes the memory of its first moment. The most intense moments become sources of joy; the most difficult moments become confirmations of hope. In both cases, the gaze is turned forward. The future becomes the task. Hence, memory plays the vital role of enabling creative freedom. Our previous reflections on the Babylonian Exile exemplify this dynamic: memory (the Exodus from Egypt) and openness (the path to new liberation). In this way, the faith of Israel moves within the dialectic of memory and liberation.

The revelation of Jesus Christ is situated precisely within this framework—that is, within the continuum of God’s historical self-disclosure. And yet, it is also a radical rupture. Jesus Christ is the full manifestation of God, who is love—the Father. He is the fulfillment of love’s promise and the inauguration of a new beginning. He is the one who bears witness to the truth of God. He is the Father’s truth and the key to Scripture. To be a Christian is not primarily to believe in a message but to believe in a person. “But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31; cf. Romans 10:9). The gospel is good news precisely because it originates in Jesus. “The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God.” (Mark 1:1)

In Jesus, God not only reveals Himself within history but becomes history. He “pitches His tent in the midst of history” (John 1:14, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us”). The gospel is good news because it was proclaimed by Jesus Himself. The message must not obscure the fact that our faith transcends and surpasses it. Our faith penetrates the gospel and reaches directly to Christ. Jesus already exists within the world. This is true—He is a historical reality. However, unlike a closed history, this reality opens up an undeniable pathway. Christ is not only the one who is present but also the one who is to come. He exists in the future of our history.

This is what we call the Parousia—a term originally referring to the arrival of a king to receive tribute and honor from his people (cf. Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1 Thessalonians 2:19, 3:13, 4:15, 5:23; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 2 Peter 1:16, 3:4). Epiphaneia refers to a divine manifestation to a worshipper or the ceremonial appearance of the Roman emperor. Apokalypsis means “unveiling” or “laying bare,” signifying the full disclosure of all things and the removal of the covering of power. Although the Parousia may entail astonishing and miraculous elements, it signifies something greater—the openness of history toward Christ, the ‘present-ness’ of the Christian community and of all humanity.

In other words, Jesus Christ becomes the one who is oppressed. The human life God chose was one of poverty and oppression. To recognize Him as the Son of the Father/Mother is to embrace that understanding in our own lives.

He was born in poverty, lived in poverty, proclaimed good news to the poor, fiercely denounced the oppressors, and stood spiritually impoverished before God. This Christ came to proclaim God to us. Both Matthew and Mark testify at the outset of their gospels that Jesus’ ministry signifies the arrival of the Kingdom of God—a kingdom that points to a globalization of divine presence. Nothing can escape from it. The “Kingdom of God” means the reign of God—His love, His identity as Father/Mother, and the community of brothers and sisters reigning among all human beings.

Jesus takes the side of the poor, the oppressed, and those marginalized by history. He proclaims a kingdom of justice and liberation for their uplift (cf. Luke 4:16–21; Isaiah 61:1–2). This proclamation of the Kingdom of God and struggle for justice led Him to death. His life and death show us that the only possible justice is true justice—justice that descends to the very root of all injustice, every betrayal of love, and the foundation of evil itself. True justice confronts all outcomes and manifestations of this rupture in divine friendship. It embodies God’s love in our conflict-ridden world and brings an end to exploitation…

3) Life-Genesis (생명-창조)

(1) Transformation as Life-Giving

Jesus Christ himself is the new covenant. In him, God becomes the Father/Mother of all nations, and all humanity recognizes themselves as God’s children and as brothers and sisters to one another. Paul declares, “For all the promises of God find their ‘Yes’ in him” (2 Cor 1:20). Similarly, the Book of Revelation proclaims that Christ is the “Amen” to the glory of God (Rev 7:12). Thus, Jesus Christ emerges as the foundational principle and starting point for biblical interpretation. In Christ, we encounter God; through human language, we read the divine Word; in historical events, we discern the fulfillment of divine promise.

This movement constitutes the foundational hermeneutical circle: from humanity to God and from God to humanity; from history to faith and from faith to history; from love for our brothers and sisters to the love of the divine Parent, and from divine love back to love for others; from human justice to divine holiness, and from divine holiness to human justice; from the poor to God, and from God back to the poor. In Christ, the new creation is fulfilled (2 Cor 5:16–17).

This fulfillment marks a new beginning, whose norm is always the “new commandment”: “Love one another as I have loved you” (John 15:12). It signifies fidelity to the new covenant—not as servants, but as friends. The universality of this new covenant is sealed by Christ’s death and confirmed by his resurrection. Jesus’ death is the consequence of his struggle for justice, his proclamation of the reign of God, and his solidarity with the poor. Like the exile of the former era, his death becomes a moment of profound revelation. It brought a crisis of faith to his disciples, as it seemed to crush the many hopes nurtured by his life and mission. Yet it also opened the possibility of a deeper understanding beyond their former covenantal framework.

We might say that his resurrection uproots him from a fixed time and space, compelling his followers to grasp the universal scope of the divine parenthood and the fraternal community he proclaimed. In the light of Easter, the disciples reread Jesus’ words and actions. Like the disciples on the road to Emmaus, their eyes are opened (Luke 24:31). There is no other path to the divine Parent except through Jesus Christ. “You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col 2:12).

(2) Communion as Relational Life-Generation

The Eucharist also unfolds within the dialectic of memory and liberation. It is a remembrance of Jesus’ death and resurrection, rooted in the context of the Passover meal that celebrated Yahweh’s liberating act of delivering the Israelites from Egypt.

The Lord’s Supper is an act of thanksgiving for all historical events in which God’s love has been revealed. But it is also a creative and liberating act that continues to impact us today. It is not a mere recollection—neither a sentimental memory nor nostalgic longing for the Lord. Rather, it is a celebration that opens toward the future, filled with fidelity and joy. It involves receiving the Spirit of Christ, for “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor 3:17). The celebration of the Lord’s Table presupposes fellowship and solidarity with the poor in history. Without this solidarity, it is impossible to comprehend the death and resurrection of the servant of Yahweh.

When God created humanity in God’s own image (Gen 1:26), it signified the divine gift of free thought within human consciousness. Paul vividly expresses the universal longing for such freedom:
“We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as children, the redemption of our bodies” (Rom 8:22–23).

Human disobedience has led to the suffering of both society and the environment. Thus, human beings must acknowledge their collective responsibility and rediscover their solidarity with all social and ecological members of the world, to participate in God’s fulfillment of a new creation.

As those who have tasted this freedom first, Christians must initiate a communal life—a training in Transforming Praxis—marching together toward God’s promised future. This includes cultivating a shared life, modeled on the life of Jesus Christ who first initiated this path. To follow him requires a disciplined walk in union with “the one who emptied himself and took the form of a servant” (Phil 2:7). It demands a training in union with the crucified and risen Christ.

[Notes]

1. Arthur, Lewis. “What Does the Bible Say about Mixed Marriage?” The Standard (June 1987): 8.
2. Pastor Emry. What Does the Holy Bible Say? (Phoenix, Ariz.: Lord’s Covenant Church, 1969), Pamphlet.
3. Sparckard, Paul R. Mixed Blood: Intermarriage and Ethnic Identity in Twentieth-Century America (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), p. 295.
4. Groat, Janet. “Augsburg Learns Major Benefactor Sent Hostile Mail.” Minneapolis Star-Tribune, February 16, 1988, sec. A.
5. Albright, William F. The Old Testament World, vol. 1 of The Interpreter’s Bible (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1952), p. 270.
6. “The Bible Speaks on Race.” The Students (March 1984): 43.
7. Kim, Kyoon Jin (김균진). “A Theological Interpretation on Openness” (개방성에 대한 신학적 해석), Christian Thought (기독교사상) (Seoul: Korean Christian Publishing House, June 1982), pp. 61–62.
8. von Rad, Gerhard. Theologie des Alten Testaments, Vol. I (Munich: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1969), p. 156.
9. Ibid., Vol. II, 1960, p. 360.
10. Barth, Karl. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik, Vol. III/1,3 (Zurich: Evangelischer Verlag A.G., 1956).
11. Zimmerli, W. Grundriss der alttestamentlichen Theologie, 1975, p. 39.
12. Thielicke, Helmut. Theological Ethics, Vol. 3 (Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979), p. 4.
13. Russell, Letty M. Human Liberation in a Feminist Perspective: A Theology (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1974).
14. “One who stands over another in the sense of being the ground of his being,” quoted in Gerhard Kittel & Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. III (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), p. 679.
15. Kim, Yi Bong Jeo (김이봉저). Feminist Theology (여성신학) (Seoul: Yangseogak Publishing House, 1985), p. 72.
16. Rendtorff, R. “Die Offenbarungsvorstellungen …,” in Offenbarung als Geschichte, 1961, p. 24.
17. Zimmerli, W. Ibid., p. 24.
18. von Rad, G. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 408.
19. Ibid.
20. Moltmann, Jürgen. Religion, pp. 50–51; Kasemann, Ernst. Jesus Means Freedom (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), p. 73.
21. Arndt, William F. and F. Wilbur Gingrich, eds. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975), p. 715.
22. Costas, Orlando E. Christ Outside the Gate: Mission Beyond Christendom (New York: Orbis Books, 1989), p. 7.
23. Alves, Rubem. A Theology of Human Hope (Corpus Books, 1969), p. 105.
24. Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1957), p. 80.
25. Kasemann, Ernst. Jesus Means Freedom, p. 76; Moltmann, Jürgen. Gospel, p. 55.
26. Perrin, Norman. Rediscovery of the Teaching of Jesus (New York: Harper & Row, 1967), pp. 224–225; Johnson, Joseph A. “Jesus, the Liberator,” in James J. Gardiner and J. Deotis Roberts, eds., Quest for a Black Theology (New York: Pilgrim Press, 1971), p. 105.
27. Dumas. “Biblical Anthropology,” in Concerning the Ordination of Women, p. 30; Trible, Phyllis. “Eve and Adam,” Andover Newton Quarterly, March 1973, p. 252.
28. Johnson, Joseph A. “Jesus, the Liberator,” in Gardiner and Roberts, eds., Quest for a Black Theology, p. 107.