German Abstract Während die große Mehrheit der deutschsprachigen Exegetinnen und Exegeten den 2. Thessalonicherbrief als nachpaulinisch betrachtet, hält ihn eine ebenso große Mehrheit der englischsprachigen Fachleute für paulinisch. Wie konnte sich in einer historischen Frage, die alle Forscher anhand derselben Evidenz bearbeiten, ein so starker Dissens herausbilden? Warum verläuft dieser Dissens ziemlich genau entlang einer Sprachgrenze? Und warum haben die echtheitskritischen Urteile der deutsch- und der englischsprachigen Forschung sich einander nicht im Laufe der Zeit angenähert? Um diese Fragen zu beantworten, ist es zwar unverzichtbar, die einleitungswissenschaftliche Diskussion der letzten 200 Jahre zur Verfasserschaft des 2. Thessalonicherbriefs zu rekapitulieren; die forschungsgeschichtliche Nachzeichnung historischer Entwicklungen führt jedoch lediglich zu einer Teilantwort. Die Beantwortung der Frage nach den Ursachen für den stabilen Dissens erfordert eine interdisziplinäre Perspektive, die nicht nur die hermeneutische Neuorientierung der römisch-katholischen Theologie im Zuge des Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils berücksichtigt, sondern vor allem auch Erkenntnisse aus der Wissenschaftssoziologie. Die Hauptthesen der etablierten Analysemodelle von Ludwik Fleck ( Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache ) und Thomas Kuhn ( The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ), die auf ihrer Auswertung naturwissenschaftlicher Forschungen basieren, gelten auch für die Bibelwissenschaften. Auch die bibelwissenschaftliche Forschung ist kein zweipoliges Geschehen zwischen den Fachleuten und ihrem Untersuchungsgegenstand, sondern wird durch deren wissenschaftliches Umfeld mitbestimmt. Mit anderen Worten: Englischsprachige Exegetinnen und Exegeten gehen nicht nur dahin, ‘wohin die Evidenz sie führt’, sondern auch dahin, wohin die Forschergemeinschaft sie führt, der sie angehören. Dasselbe gilt mit umgekehrten Vorzeichen für ihre deutschsprachigen Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Im Idealfall verschafft ein verstärktes Bewusstsein für die sozialen Zusammenhänge, die auch auf jeden deutsch- und englischsprachigen Bibelwissenschaftler einwirken, den historischen und exegetischen Argumenten im internationalen Dialog mehr Gewicht.
The article argues that the reference to the fig tree under which Jesus claims to have seen Nathanael (John 1.48) has not been satisfactorily discussed by previous critical interpreters. Instead, the tree should be understood against the backdrop of Second Temple and later Jewish and Christian exegetical discussions about what species the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil exactly was. After tracing these debates in ancient and early medieval sources, including iconography, the argument moves on to show the interpretative possibilities created by this proposal. The conclusion makes a case for understanding the Fourth Gospel as an inherently open work which invites the audience to actively participate in a variety of exegetical discourses, and whose author function builds its authority through polysemy.
This article develops the position of Rebekah Eklund's earlier NTS article on alpha nu omicron iota alpha in Luke 6.11. Eklund argues that there is no basis for translating alpha nu omicron iota alpha in Luke 6.11 as rage or fury. Instead, she shows that alpha nu omicron iota alpha is used consistently to indicate folly that is either induced by madness or ignorance. This article offers a reading of the healing of the man with the withered hand in Luke 6.6-11 that provides a more congenial context for the conventional way of reading alpha nu omicron iota alpha as madness-induced folly.
John William Colenso's Commentary on Romans, written during his time as Bishop of Natal and published in 1861, remains neglected in the field of New Testament studies, as does Colenso's work more generally, despite some notable recent attention. The commentary is, however, of considerable interest. It displays some significant similarities with the much later New Perspective on Paul, and offers an early example of a participationist reading of Paul, seen through the lens of Colenso's inclusive and universalist theology. It also shares some of the problems of the New Perspective, particularly in terms of its critique of Judaism. The commentary is also significant and relevant to current debates about decolonisation, because of the ways in which the African context shaped Colenso's reading of the letter and because of the powerful critique of (English) ethnic and (Christian) religious superiority that Colenso finds in Romans.
A growing consensus interprets the Pastoral phrasing mu iota & varsigma; gamma upsilon nu alpha iota kappa & varsigma; nu rho (1 Tim 3.2, 12; Titus 1.6) and nu & varsigma; nu delta rho & varsigma; gamma upsilon nu (1 Tim 5.8) in reference to church leaders and widows as 'spousal fidelity', despite this not being an intuitive approach to the phrases. This article contends that one-spouse traditions were widely enough known in the Greco-Roman and Jewish worlds - especially once objections and misunderstandings are resolved - to render comprehensible a limitation to a single spouse. The univira traditions, for instance, apply to both women and men and include reference to faithfulness. The application of these traditions to widows was not a Christian innovation, lasted into the imperial era and influenced both Jews and early Christian authors. One-spouse traditions were also extant in the eastern part of the Empire. Some sectors of Judaism attest to such traditions. Jesus-sayings also prohibit remarriage. Lastly, the requirement for chi rho alpha iota to marry in 1 Tim 5.11, 14 does not contradict this qualification for 'real' widows (5.9) since they were likely 'virgin-widows', admonished to marry for the first time, and the Pastoral emphasis is on identifying those with less resources, requiring more extensive assistance from the churches. The Pastorals' insistence on a single marriage for officeholders and 'real' widows is yet another example of how Christ-believers are to be exemplars of, if not exceeding, the very best in Roman piety and marital values.
Against the near-universal consensus that it was created by a pagan (non-Christian) in order to satirise Christian worship, this article contends that the Alexamenos graffito can plausibly be read as a Christian self-parody, created by the enslaved Alexamenos himself. It is the first full-length treatment of the authorial origins of the Alexamenos graffito. The article first provides an overview of the visual and scholarly histories of the image since the nineteenth century. Then it addresses evidence for and against reading the text as non-Christian or Christian in origin, focusing on the apparent sexualisation of Jesus, early Christian receptions of satirical depictions of Jesus, the graffito's use of a titulus, the solidarity of the image with enslaved workers and the relevance of nearby Christian graffiti. Finally, it places the graffito in conversation with ancient self-parody practices from wider Greek, Roman and Christian sources. While it is impossible to argue definitively about the identity of the graffito's creator, this article contends that scholarship cannot exclude the possibility and potential likelihood that it may be Christian in origin.
Early Jewish parodies of ancient Mediterranean cult images have long been taken as a point of cat- egorical difference between Jews and non-Jews. The basic logic can be stated with maximal brevity: Jews were aniconic, indeed 'anti-idolic', while Greeks and Romans were iconic. When it comes to the question of so-called idolatry and Jewish polemics against it, Jews were ostensibly unique within the wider world of ancient Mediterranean religion. In this article, I interrogate such claims specifically as they relate to the apostle Paul, as one such Jewish polemicist, who wrote to a predominantly gentile audience well accustomed to image piety and sensitive to its internal politics. I argue that early Jewish image parodies, including Paul's own, are better understood to be situated within an iconopolitical strategy of cultural production that was otherwise common among Greeks and Romans, no less than Jews. By caricaturing cult images as non-existent, disabled or dead, it is my contention that Paul operated within and innovated upon a widespread tradition of ancient Mediterranean image politics, which configured social power relations between humans and their gods by abducting, mutilating or destroying their images, and that Paul's parodies were intelligible and recognisable as such among his gentile followers. After outlining the comparative problems of 'idolatry', I draw from classical and art-historical scholarship to theorise the epiphanic and reciprocal dynamics of images in ancient Mediterranean religion, and then redescribe Jewish image parodies in Paul's letters as operating within these same dynamics, even while polemicising against them.
This article examines the function of the night burglar similes (1 Thess 5.2, 4) within the broader context of Paul's First Letter to the Thessalonians. It aims to demonstrate that these similes are integral to Paul's discourses on the Lord's parousia (4.13-18) and the Lord's Day (5.1-11) and argue that the similes serve as a thematic link between these narratives, creating a connection that aligns their timing and unfolding. Furthermore, the article examines the Lord's parousia and Day, along with the associated events of dispossession and dislocation, as complementary aspects of a single eschatological event - bringing salvation to those in the light and disaster to those in darkness. The literary structure, rhetorical strategies, thematic elements and linguistic nuances of 1 Thess 4.13-5.11 support this interpretation, positioning the similes as integral components of the parousia and Day discourses. Additionally, the article reflects on the significance of the night burglar's 'loot' and its connection to the Thessalonians as valuable vessels (4.4-5) and their need to don God's armour (5.8).
In the BDAG entry for the noun sigma kappa eta nu omicron pi omicron iota omicron sigma (used in Acts 18.3 to refer to the trade in which Priscilla, Aquila and Paul worked during Paul's first visit to Corinth), Frederick Danker broke with tradition and listed the word's primary sense as 'maker of stage properties'. The more familiar translation of 'tentmaker' is listed second as an alternative possible meaning, but after a brief survey of the surviving evidence, Danker concludes that 'one is left with the strong probability that Luke's publics in urban areas, where theatrical productions were in abundance, would think of sigma kappa eta nu omicron pi omicron iota omicron sigma; in ref. to matters theatrical'. Despite the far-reaching implications of Danker's claim, if true, it has been given little consideration in subsequent scholarship and has been more frequently ignored than evaluated or adopted. In this article I assess Danker's claim, beginning with the lexicographical evidence that he himself adduces before broadening the field of inquiry to include discussion of texts in which cognate terms such as sigma kappa eta nu omicron pi omicron iota epsilon omega and sigma kappa eta nu omicron pi omicron iota pi alpha are used with theatre-related meanings, the translation decisions made in the surviving Vetus Latina versions, the scenic architecture of Roman theatres in the early imperial period, and theatre-related attitudes and practices in first-century Judaism and early Christianity. After weighing the various evidence sources and contextual considerations, I conclude that Danker's proposal is more likely than not, and that a stronger case can be made for it than he himself makes within the confines of the BDAG entry.
According to David M. Moffitt, Passover themes permeate Hebrews 1-2. While Passover is normally understood to be apotropaic, Jesus' death in 2.14-15 defeats the devil. How is this defeat achieved? This article proposes that this victory is a synthesis of several strands of Jewish and early Christian tradition, conflating traditions about Jesus' paschal death and war against demonic evil. This conflation likely reflects contemporary Jewish beliefs about angels. In Second Temple literature, Michael, Melchizedek and the heavenly hosts fight against demonic forces opposed to God. In Hebrews, the Passover typologically foreshadows the liberating work of Christ, with the devil taking the place of Pharaoh and the realm of the dead as Egypt, the place of bondage. Just as Moses leads the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt, so does Christ liberate the dead from death and slavery to the devil through his complete experience of human death and his triumphant resurrection. This article therefore suggests that Hebrews contains early evidence for Christian belief in the descensus Christi and the harrowing of Hades, conceived as a new exodus from the bondage of death to heavenly glory. Therefore, when Christ rises from the dead, he does not do so alone, but rises as the first of those liberated from death, providing new significance to the quotation of Isa 8.18 in Heb 2.13.
This article explores the critical possibilities that arise in New Testament studies when we view palaeography as a subjective discipline. In response to recent trends in palaeography that contrive new tools and techniques for making 'objective' judgements regarding the dates of manuscripts, I argue that another equally valid approach is to embrace palaeography as a practice akin to aesthetics, one that relies on observation and judgements about shapes to create new contexts for interpretation. Even if palaeography is no longer considered as 'scientific' as it was in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, there are multiple new opportunities that arise when we place palaeographic discourse and its critical practices into conversation with other disciplines.
Based on recent theoretical reflections on the links between space and rituals, this paper re-examines early Christian meal practice. Since the 1980s, many scholars have agreed that early Christ groups met in private houses inside a given city and celebrated their meals in the form of the Greco-Roman banquet. However, the idea that early Christ groups met 'almost exclusively' in private houses has been disputed in recent years. This paper expands on one of the suggested alternative meeting spaces: the graveyard. Tombs of the rich and poor lined the roads running in and out of an ancient city. The tradition handed down by Paul and the Synoptic Gospels (1 Cor 11.23-5/Mark 14.22-4 par.) can be located here. It contains a story fragment linked in form and content to laments that might have been part of a dramatically narrated passion account with a subsequent mortuary meal. This shows how spatial contextualisation can expand the reconstruction of the diversity of early Christian meal celebrations.
In the first part of the twentieth century, Henry Cadbury argued for the unity of Luke and Acts and made the phrase Luke-Acts a standard expression in scholarship. While there have always been challenges, in recent decades the number of these has increased. One area that has not been adequately explored is the study of how ancients produced multi-scroll works. This study analyses two practices using four examples for each: two Hellenistic and two Jewish. The first is the practice of composing secondary prefaces for the second and subsequent scrolls in multi-scroll works. The purpose of the secondary preface was to create a link between the scrolls. The second is the practice of releasing a scroll when it was completed before the full complement of scrolls for the work was composed and ready for circulation. This essay suggests that Acts 1.1-2 is a secondary preface that binds Acts to Luke and that there is a gap in time between the release of Luke and the release of Acts, which helps to explain both their differences and their independent circulation in the early church. It is not an argument about genre since these practices were common in various genres. It is an argument that Luke and Acts cannot be separated from one another without ignoring ancient conventions.*
The Latin translators of the New Testament often rendered the middle/passive verb delta iota alpha kappa rho iota nu omicron mu alpha iota with words for doubt or indecision (haesito, dubito). However, in post-classical Greek, delta iota alpha kappa rho iota nu omicron mu alpha iota never means 'to doubt'. Earlier practitioners of a theologically driven philology supposed that the New Testament authors themselves created a new meaning for the word - an untenable position from the perspective of modern lexicography. How then did delta iota alpha kappa rho iota nu omicron mu alpha iota become 'doubt'? This article offers a two-pronged answer through literary-historical and cognitive linguistic analysis. First, I trace how the Greek words delta iota alpha kappa rho iota nu omicron mu alpha iota and delta iota psi upsilon chi omicron sigma ('double-minded') became associated with the concept of 'doubt' through the Christian reception of the Jewish Two Ways tradition and the Letter of James. I show how the discursive connections between delta iota alpha kappa rho iota nu omicron mu alpha iota, delta iota psi upsilon chi omicron sigma and 'doubt' (delta iota sigma tau alpha zeta omega) influenced the rendering of both terms within Coptic and Latin translation traditions. Second, I show how the same data can be analysed within a cognitive linguistic perspective, offering a model for lexicographical analysis that is grounded in modern linguistic theory.
The essay explores the implications of Paul's description of himself as an 'old man' (pi rho epsilon sigma beta upsilon tau eta sigma) in Phlm. 9 for his rhetorical strategy, his psychological state and his social role. The essay first counters the interpretation of pi rho epsilon sigma beta upsilon tau eta sigma in Phlm. 9 as 'ambassador' and identifies the sources of the interpreters' resistance to Paul's description of himself as an 'old man'. On the basis of demographic data, the essay suggests that Paul was a man of about sixty when he wrote to Philemon and that Paul would have aged prematurely in consequence of what he had suffered as an apostle. The essay then argues that Paul's description of himself as an 'old man' functions in the argumentative rhetoric of his epistle both as a pathetic and an ethical appeal, simultaneously arousing pity and engendering respect. Finally, the essay contemplates the source of the 'confidence' shown by Paul in his appeal to Philemon, despite his senescence and imprisonment.
Contra graecum, against the Greek, is a term used in the critical apparatus of the so-called Oxford Vulgate to indicate passages where individual manuscripts, early Christian authors or the entire Latin tradition present a text that differs from the Greek witnesses. This contribution discusses three examples from 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 7.33-4, 15.5, 14.11). At 1 Cor 7.33-4, verse divisions have varied ever since the first printed New Testament with modern verse numbers (Estienne 1551). This is partly due to the different interpretations of the verb mu epsilon mu epsilon rho iota sigma tau alpha iota either as masculine or feminine. The difference is discussed already in early Christian authors, with Jerome finding meaning in both despite a preference for the masculine form. In 1 Cor 15.5, the number of people to whom Christ appeared differs, with 'twelve' in Greek and 'eleven' in Latin. Only a few Greek witnesses read 'eleven', including bilingual codices (Claromontanus, Boernerianus and Augiensis). Again, the difference was discussed already by early Christian authors, with Augustine finding meaning in both numbers. In 1 Cor 14.11, the Greek text identifies both the speaker and the listener as unintelligible 'barbarians' to each other. In contrast, the Latin text refers to two speakers, thus interpreting the passage strictly in the context of speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14.9, 13). The three examples from 1 Corinthians illustrate the main challenges of New Testament textual criticism, including those of contamination, coincidence of readings, incomplete transmission, and, in the case of bilingual manuscripts, mutual influence of readings.
One of the intriguing features of the Petrine household code (1 Pet 2.18-3.7) is the lack of instructions to masters. A common view claims that there are no instructions because there were no Christian masters in the community. This view, however, is textually and historically unlikely. This essay, rather, considers how the instructions to enslaved persons and the lack of instructions to masters might have been heard from the perspective of a Christian master. The first part of the essay highlights some features of literature on household management and perceptions of enslaved persons' moral competency. The essay then turns to 1 Peter to analyse the theological perspective of the household code and the description of enslaved persons. I propose that the author has intentionally ignored masters as part of his defining the house of God.
In research literature and works of art, the textual gap of Mary's bodily action, implicit in Jesus' phrase mu eta mu omicron nu alpha pi tau omicron nu (John 20.17b), is frequently filled either with a proskynesis or a standing embrace. Against the background of Judith Butler's theory of gesture, this article analyses attempts at filling in the gaps in the text. The notion of gesture as bodily quotation helps to interpret Mary and Jesus not as counterparts, but as a performative unit enacting continuity and difference after Jesus' death. The reading offered in this article focuses on the interaction between bodies, and it undermines the dichotomy between speech and body, man and woman, heaven and earth. This article examines exegetical interpretations of Mary's gesture, alongside artistic interpretations, to show that the way the textual gap is filled is significant because gestures are significant.
The goal of this article is to explain two words which commentators often find puzzling - Paul's epsilon pi omega sigma, which hesitantly qualify his expectation of resurrection in Phil 3.11. After considering the semantics of epsilon pi omega sigma, and various scholarly interpretations of this verse, this article will propose what is very much currently a minority view, and will offer further evidence for it. The explanation for Paul's epsilon pi omega sigma kappa alpha tau alpha nu tau sigma omega epsilon i sigma tau nu xi alpha nu sigma tau alpha sigma iota nu tau nu kappa nu epsilon kappa rho nu in Phil 3.11 is to be found in his uncertainty about whether he will die and be raised, or whether he will survive until the parousia. The clause also indicates his preference for the former.
