We assess St. Paul's account of kenōsis in Philippians 2:5–8 from a neurophenomenological horizon. We argue that kenōsis is not primarily a unique event but belongs to a class of experiences that could be called kenotic and are, at least in principle, to some degree accessible to all human beings. These experiences can be well analyzed, making use of both a phenomenological approach and the cognitive neuroscience of altered states of consciousness. We argue that kenotic experiences are ecstatic, in that (...) they involve—both phenomenologically and neurologically—one's "stepping out of" his/her self and history. This seemingly impossible task of stepping out has led to the understanding of kenōsis as a unique event. We conclude that kenotic experiences are continuous with common, everyday experiences of the self's intimate communion with everything that exists. This means that kenotic Christology does not necessarily have to rest solely on the scriptures but can also be arrived at by way of the worldly experiences of actual, living persons. (shrink)

Various approaches to Paul's relationship with the Roman Empire have come to the fore, including those who see Paul's discourse as anti-imperial, pro-imperial, ambiguous towards empire and those who argue that Paul's discourse transcends that of empire. The nature and influence of the Roman Empire are examined, and the various scholarly approaches to Paul's relationship to empire are considered. Romans 13:1-7 is used as a test case to better understand Paul's stance towards the Roman Empire or government authorities in general. (...) Although it has been argued that Paul's stance towards empire was influenced by 'Jewish apocalyptic', in this contribution, it is argued that Paul's eschatology as laid out in his letters rather than 'Jewish apocalyptic' as such is key to understanding the seemingly ambiguous statements about the Roman Empire in his letters. CONTRIBUTION: This article's contribution mainly lies in its approach to understand Paul's relationship to the Roman Empire from the perspective of his own eschatology. Here, traditional understandings of Paul's relationship to empire is put in a larger perspective, which contributes in solving Paul's seemingly ambiguous stance towards Roman authority. (shrink)