On 10 November 1883, addressing his Göttingen colleagues and students in academic celebration of the quadricentennial of Luther's birth, Albrecht Ritschl (1822–89) delivered this remarkable verdict: “The genuine ideas of the Reformation were more concealed than disclosed in the theological works of Luther and Melanchthon.” The Wittenberg reformers themselves, not merely their epigones, had failed to systematize and safeguard those original epoch-making ideas by which they had effected their dramatic reform of religious life within the late medieval church.

In the year in which we commemorate the centennial of both the Archaeological Institute of America and the Society of Biblical Literature, it may be appropriate in the pages of the Harvard Theological Review to offer an appreciation of one of Harvard's own faculty, the only American scholar who was a leading theoretician in both the fields of biblical theology and biblical archaeology, the late G. E. Wright.

In Laws 8.835b–842a Plato puzzles over the question of how the lawgiver is to inculcate proper behavior in matters of sexual activity. The problem is made more difficult by the fact that he would like to define proper sexual activity much more narrowly than any Greek legislator before him ever had. He would limit it to acts between man and wife which are capable of resulting in conception (838e–39a). Every other sexual manifestation, homosexual or heterosexual, is to be forbidden.

Critical scholarship on the Hebrew Bible a hundred years ago held a much lower estimation of the role of law in the religion of ancient Israel and of the value of biblical law than do scholars today. Julius Wellhausen, for example, whose work was the most influential of the nineteeth century, maintained that in its creative period, Israel had no law, but only “usage and tradition” which “were looked on to a large extent as the institution of the Deity.” Thus, the prophets, whom Wellhausen stressed, did not preach out of any legal tradition in his view, but rather “out of the spirit which judges all things and itself is judged of no man.” In their canonical shape, however, the materials ancient Israel bequeathed us are so strongly nomistic that even Wellhausen could not deny that at a certain point law became central, displacing the spirit. That point marks the transition from Israelite religion to something new called “Judaism,” which is distinguished by the idea of a written Torah. Judaism, in Wellhausen's theory, represents the senility of Israel, for “a body of traditional practice should only be written down when it is threatening to die out, and … a book should be, as it were, the ghost of a life which is closed.” This transition from usage to codified law reflects a fundamental change in the nature of the relationship of God and Israel, a change from a purely natural relationship to one of covenant.

Even when a division draws heavily upon the facts of Scripture, as does Mishnah's division of Damages, the framers and organi resort to Scripture's theory of what is to be done with those facts. The scriptural data, while essential, simply are incidental to the formation and theory of the Mishnaic system. In no way do the theories of substance or organization of scriptural law-codes impress the framers of Mishnah, who choose their own outline to make their own points. What is further to be seen is that, when we compare the systemic constructions of another Israelite group of approximately the same time and the same place, in this instance, the Essene community represented by the so-called Damascus Covenant, which provides considerable information on the political structures envisaged in its community, we gain a measure of insight.

At least from the time of the influential analysis of B. Duhm in 1899, a scholarly consensus has developed which judges Psalm 89 to be a composite of poems of widely different date. Often cited is the view of H. Gunkel: to an old hymn (vv 29–52) a lament (vv 39–52) has been appended. The hymn was joined to the lament by interposing vv 20–38 and at the same time vv 4–5 were inserted. Articles in recent years have challenged the prevalent view of original disunity. J. M. Ward in 1961 showed that arguments based on metric considerations are not conclusive and that logic, vocabulary links throughout the whole poem, and poetic structure all argue that the psalm was a single poem from the that logic, vocabulary links throughout the whole poem, and poetic structure all argue that the psalm was a single poem from the beginning. In 1972 J.-B. Dumortier showed convincingly on purely literary grounds that at least two of the sections commonly thought to be diverse, the so-called royal poem of vv 2−5+20−38 and the cosmic hymn of vv 6–19, were in fact originally one.

In a recent analysis of Acts 27–28, Miles and Trompf have emphasized the strategic position of these sections in the text and their value as a kind of witness for Lukan theology. Luke's statement that “everyone escaped to land” after the shipwreck (27:44), they argue, is in fact a “long-forgotten theological punch line.” To an ancient reader, the assertion that all escaped with their lives would, they contend, be prima facie evidence of Paul's innocence. Drawing on pagan concepts of divine retribution, pollution, and shipwreck, they attempt to reconstruct the attitude of this reader on his first encounter with these passages. If Paul had been guilty, such a reader, according to their reconstruction, would have believed that his pollution should have resulted in death for himself and/or fellow passengers. The fact that no one died, however, would amount to “decisive confirmation of Paul's innocence.” There was no need, therefore, to relate the outcome of Paul's appeal to Caesar since he had already been put to the test “by forces and exigencies far more dreaded than the requirements of a human law court.”

A quick glance through the commentaries and translations will show that most scholars see no serious textual problems in Isa 28:12. Laberge has suggested that “he said,” be corrected to “I kept saying,” and everyone notes the extra aleph at the end of “they were (not) willing …,” but otherwise the text appears to be universally regarded as sound. The present writer does not share that optimism, however. Perhaps the following stichometric arrangement of the verse will convey the difficulty he perceives:

To the men and women of the Middle Ages the figure of Constantine loomed large over the fourth century. Born a pagan, he converted to Christianity and became the first Christian emperor, the convenor of councils, the defender of orthodoxy, the builder of churches, the herald of a new age, the founder of Christian Europe. But to the men and women of the later fourth century, the generation of John Chrysostom, it was not Constantine, but Julian, raised a Christian only to forsake his “hereditary piety,” Julian the pagan emperor, Julianus Apostata, whose deeds were alive in their memory. The age of Constantine was part of past history, but Julian's actions, abortive as they may have appeared to later generations, were still remembered not only by the old, says John Chrysostom, but also by the “young people” of our day.

The concluding line of the short eschatological passage in Hab 2:2–4 is a locus classicus both within the biblical tradition and for subsequent theological reflection in the light of that tradition. Within the Bible it connects by well-beaten paths with other classic loci such as Gen 15:6, Rom 1:16–17 and Heb 11:1 (through the latter's contiguity with Heb 10:37–39). Beyond the Bible its importance is perhaps best known, within the Christian tradition, through Martin Luther's sola fide interpretation of it as quoted in Romans.

There are two extant copies of the Old Syriac gospels, the evangelion da-mepharreshe. One, the Curetonian Codex (=C), was discovered by William Cureton and edited by him in 1858. It dates to the middle or later part of the fifth century. The other, the Sinaitic Codex (=S), was discovered by Mrs. Agnes Smith Lewis and her sister Mrs. Margaret Dunlop Gibson at St. Catherine's monastery on Mount Sinai. It dates to the later part of the fourth or beginning of the fifth century. Both MSS have a number of lacunae. In combination, however, they preserve most of the text of the four gospels. Although they are not identical their agreements are sufficient to show that they belong to the same translation. S is generally thought to preserve the original text better than C. C, however, sometimes preserves older readings than S.

Studies on the essence and development of the concept of original sin abound. Not only has this fundamental tenet of Christian theology played an important role in the history of Western religious thought, but it continues to command the attention of scholars and theologians even today. Given this great interest, one is occasionally surprised at the narrowness of the historical and religious framework to which many have confined their discussions of original sin. All too often, scholars have overlooked the significance which events within the community they are examining or parallel developments in other religious communities might have for explicating a new direction in the history of this doctrine. While the present study can hope neither to reformulate the findings of the voluminous literature on original sin nor to compensate in large measure for this methodological shortcoming at times inherent in it, it will attempt to demonstrate by example how the notion of original sin did not evolve in a historical vacuum. It both drew from and contributed to prevalent philosophical and political theory, and it even interacted significantly with non-Christian religious concepts.

While the study of word pairs and word patterns in Hebrew reaches back even before Lowth's lectures on poetry in 1753, it has intensified considerably since the discovery of the Ugaritic texts and the recognition of both shared and distinctive word patterns in Hebrew and Ugaritic poetry. There is no need to rehearse here the history of this research. Avishur has summarized that with relatively full bibliography in his article in Semitics. The result of these investigations is to make the reader of biblical and extrabiblical texts more aware of both the traditional material and patterns available to the writers of prose and poetry as well as the creativity of the poet, especially in shaping a poem or lines of poetry in different ways as individuality and the traditional are blended together in the poetic composition.

In view of the enormous expansion of biblical studies in the last century it is highly exceptional when a book published more than a hundred years ago remains today the basic work on its subject. Such is Jakob Freudenthal's study of the Hellenistic Jewish writers preserved by Alexander Polyhistor. Like any classic which remains influential for a long time, Freudenthal's work has not only laid the foundations for further study but has also perpetuated a number of misconceptions. One case where Freudenthal's opinion has distorted subsequent research is the epic poem of Theodotus, preserved in Eusebius' Praeparatio Evangelica 9.22.1–11. Freudenthal classified Theodotus with the so-called Ps. Eupolemus, Cleodemus Malchas, and Thallus, all of whom he regarded as Samaritans and all of whom have strongly syncretistic features. This view of Theodotus has persisted in much of the literature, from Schürer down to the recent reviews by Denis, Hengel, and Wacholder. We will argue, on the contrary, that the surviving fragments present a rigidly exclusive view of Judaism and reflect the anti-Samaritan propaganda of the Hasmoneans. The combination of a distinctively Hellenistic form with a militant and exclusive Judaism provides an interesting example of the blending of Judaism and Hellenism in the period following the Maccabean revolt.

Paul Tillich's theology is largely an attempt to interpret or at least illuminate Christian concepts by using ontological or philosophical concepts. An important part of Tillich's system is his treatment of sin and the fall, a treatment that is in effect an analysis of existence. But this analysis is beset with ambiguities and difficulties. It is my purpose here to clarify and to defend Tillich's existential analysis.

So Aṇṭāḷ begins her poem Tiruppāvai, portraying in thirty verses one episode in the life of Krishna and his cowherd lovers, but one highly significant for the Śrī Vaiṣṇavas of South India. In this poem, they believe, is embedded the essence of the Upanishads, and through it the Lord Vishnu will bathe his devotees with grace and unending delight. The purpose of this study is to consider what Śrī Vaiṣṇavas believe the essential teaching of the Upanishads to be and how it is found in the text. To do so we will focus on the theme of bathing as it is portrayed in the poem itself, in the traditional account of the poet's life, and in the earliest complete commentary on the poem.

The problem addressed in this paper is implied in the title. The terms “apocryphal” and “canonical” reflect a traditional usage which implies deep-seated prejudices and has had far-reaching consequences. Any standard dictionary, like Merriam-Webster, will explain the term “apocryphal” as “not canonical; unauthentic; spurious.” The synonyms are listed under “fictitious,” i.e., “invented or imagined rather than true and genuine,” and the term “apocryphal” is explained here as follows: “implies a mysterious or extremely dubious source of origin.”

The following reassessment of present-day NT textual criticism requires, by its very nature, a brief statement of the circumstances that occasioned it. Seven years ago, in the W. H. P. Hatch Memorial Lecture at the 1973 annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, I attempted in fifty minutes an adventuresome—if not audacious— assessment of the entire scope of NT textual criticism during the past century. Though this was an instructive exercise for me and one that others report as instructive also for them, it was inevitable that so bold an undertaking would elicit sharp criticism. The first hint of this came from Münster in 1976, but more clearly within the past year or so in an invitation to subscribe to a Festschrift for Matthew Black containing an article by Kurt Aland of Münster with an announced title—appearing as it did in English—that had a highly familiar ring: “The Twentieth-Century Interlude in New Testament Textual Criticism,” obviously the title of the Hatch Lecture, which, following its presentation, had been published in the 1974 volume of JBL When the Festschrift itself appeared, it seemed obvious from Professor Aland's article that some reassessment of the course and significance of twentieth-century NT textual criticism was in order. Late in September 1979, Aland's article was reprinted in the annual report of his Münster foundation for NT textual research, now under the title of “Die Rolle des 20. Jahrhunderts in der Geschichte der neutestamentlichen Textkritik.”

The rabbinic influence on Origen's exegesis of the Song of Songs has been the focus of three major studies.