Against the consensus that ‘peace and security’ in 1 Thess 5.3 is an allusion to a common Roman imperial slogan, it is argued that, while ‘peace’ does, in fact, evoke Roman propaganda's promise of a stable society to her loyal subjects, ‘security’ has its roots in the Hellenistic conception of the polis as the guarantor of stability. Paul himself combined these two catchwords, thereby promoting a counterclaim both to Roman imperial power and to Hellenistic visions of the ideal civic society. Neither can offer true security in the face of the apocalyptic cataclysm he is convinced is coming. That can be found, as far as he is concerned, only in identifying with the community of believers in Jesus.

Luke 24.13–35 narrates the story of how the recently crucified and risen Christ meets up with two of his perplexed and despondent disciples as they are walking from Jerusalem to the town of Emmaus, how he explains to them as they walk together that it had been foretold long ago by the prophets that Christ would suffer and die, how he is persuaded by them, when evening has come, to break his journey at their home in Emmaus, how he reveals himself to them at dinner in the breaking of the bread, and, finally, how the two disciples return immediately, even at this late hour, to Jerusalem in order to report these miraculous events to the 11 apostles.

Recently in this journal H. C. Kee has exposed and refuted perceived anachronistic notions concerning the existence of the pre-70 CE synagogue.1 According to Kee's thesis, the pre-70 CE synagogue was not a distinctive architectural edifice, but a voluntary gathering place for worship. Kee writes:

The earliest distinct buildings date from the third century, and vary widely in style and interior arrangements. There is simply no evidence to speak of synagogues in Palestine as architecturally distinguishable edifices prior to 200 CE. Evidence of meeting places: ‘Yes’, both in private homes and in public buildings. Evidence of distinctive architectural features of a place of worship or for study of Torah: ‘No’.2

As a result, Kee attempts to redate the Theodotus inscription, our major epigraphical source for the pre-70 CE Palestinian synagogue, to the ‘mid–second to late third century CE’.3 This late dating is necessary in Kee's theory, since this inscription documents a succession of synagogue rulers, extending back to Theodotus’ grandfather, which would place the Palestinian synagogue and its institutions well into the first century BCE.

Die Psalmen Salomos sind ein für die frühjüdische Vorstellung von der δικαιοσύνην Gottes überaus wichtiges Zeugnis. Werden sie in der Forschung zumeist als Ausdruck pharisäischer Frömmigkeit, in der die Vorstellungen von der Gerechtigkeit Gottes und seiner Barmherzigkeit auseinanderfallen, gewertet, so versucht der vorliegende Beitrag zu zeigen, daβ die Verhältnisbestimmung beider Gröβen differenzierter ist. Die PsSal rücken die Vorstellung von der Gerechtigkeit Gottes eng mit seinem züchtigenden Handeln an den Frommen zusammen und gebrauchen hierfür die Termini παιδεία bzw παιδεύειν. Ein vergleichen-der Blick auf das Qumran-Schrifttum zeigt, daβ beide frühjüdischen Konzeptionen in je eigenerWeise als Hintergrund der paulinischen Rede von der δικαιοσύνην θεοῦ relevant sind.

Der hierapolitanische Bischof Papias formulierte im Proömium seiner Auslegung von Herrenspriichen ein bemerkenswertes Arbeitsprinzip: ‘Ich nahm nicht an, daβ die (Nachrichten) aus den Büchern mir soviel nützen wie die von einer lebendigen und bleibenden Stimme (mitgeteilten Nachrichten)(ού γὰρ τὰἐĸ τῶν βιβλίων τοσοῦτόν με ώφελεῖν ύπελάμβανον ὄσον τὰ παρὰ ζώσης φωνῆς ĸαì μενούσης). ’1 Aus dieser Aussage des Papias über den Vorzug der viva vox hat man recht weitgehende kanongeschichtliche Schlüsse gezogen. Da Papias der mündlichen gegenüber der schriftlichen Überlieferung grundsätzlich den Vorzug einraume, könne nach seinem Urteil die Normativität der Herrenworte noch nicht auf die sie verzeichnenden Evangelienschriften übergegangen sein. Darum könne Papias die (ihm bekannten) schriftlichen Evangelien noch nicht als ‘endgültige oder kanonische Form der Jesus-Überlieferung’ angesehen haben.2 Die in seiner Aussage reflektierte Vorliebe der kleinasiatischen Gemeinden für die mundliche Tradition habe die Entstehung eines schriftlichen Kanons verzögert.3 Andere Forscher haben dieser Folgerung entgegengehalten, das Prinzip von der Überlegenheit der viva vox sei in den Augen des Papias nicht von allgemeiner Gültigkeit gewesen und von ihm gar nicht auf die Evangelien bezogen worden. Es sei deswegen auch nicht von kanongeschichtlicher Relevanz.4

Mit der Wahl von ϰρηματίζειν zur Umschreibung der Gen 6–7 an Noah ergangenen Gottesoffenbarung greift der Verfasser des Hebräerbriefs Hebr 11.7 einen Terminus auf, der in der Orakelsprache beheimatet ist und in diesem Sinne auch vom hellenistischen Judentum rezipiert wird. Dadurch soil die im AT noch unmittelbar vorgestellte Kommunikation zwischen Gott und Mensch in eine mittelbare, d.h. sich im Orakel oder im Traum ereignende, überführt werden. Bestätigung findet diese These einerseits in der Zeichnung Noahs als Mantiker innerhalb der früüdischen Literatur (Jub; Philo), andererseits in der Existenz eines Henochorakels am Ende der Welt, das neben anderen auch von Noah selbst (2 Hen65.1–12) befragt wird.

Ulrich Luz schreibt in seinem kleinen, sehr anregenden Büchlein, Matthew in History: Interpretation, Influence and Effects: ‘Even Matthew himself seems to have completely forgotten what he had written in the Sermon of the Mount when he was writing his twenty-third chapter, with the harsh and unjust woes agains Pharisees and Scribes.’ Eines der hier angerissenen Probleme ist viel ausgeprägter in Lk 6 feststellbar, wo dem Gebot der Feindesliebe unmittelbar die Wehesprüche gegen die Reichen vorangestellt sind. Es begegnet aber schon in der Logienquelle und bei Paulus. Wie ist das Verhältnis dieser beiden Aussagen zu einander zu sehen? Das ist die Frage, der wir im folgenden nachgehen wollen

Cette critique de la rédaction de Lc 24 découpe le chapitre en six unités: les femmes au tombeau (1–11), Pierre au tombeau (12), Emmaüs (13–32), la christophanie à Pierre (33–5), la christophanie aux Onze (36–49) et l'ascension (50–3). Chaque unité a sa fonction propre dans la mise en place des bases essentielles à la continuité théologique, éthique et missionnaire entre Luc et Actes. Par l'enchaînement de ses récits dans une progression calculée, Lc 24 jette la passerelle nécessaire à la perpétuation du message de Jésus de Nazareth à travers l'Église primitive.

There is no adequate evidence of a ‘Son of Man’ concept in Jesus’ time, nor of a common Aramaism for ‘man’ (misunderstood by Aramaic-speaking evangelists). Ps 8.6 was widely used to explain the delay in Christians’ resurrection: the υιος ανθρωπου to whom all would be subjected in time was Jesus. Heb 2.8–9 makes this explicit, proving Jesus’ incarnation (‘briefly inferior to angels’), cross and resurrection (‘crowned . . . because of the suffering of death’). Mark exploits the title: Jesus was the Son of Man, prophesied to come, to die and to rise; and the similar phrase in Dan 7.13 suggests his parousia and authority.

A survey of the current state of research shows that scholars are at an impasse regarding the text of Matt 16.2b–3. A fresh application of reasoned eclecticism to the unit uncovers new evidence supporting the longer reading. A reappraisal of the Greek manuscripts, early versions and early Christian literature shows that the longer and shorter readings are of approximately equal antiquity as far as can be established from presently available evidence. Analysis of the Eusebian apparatus strongly suggests that the shorter reading was often the result of intentional scribal change. Of the various explanations for such change, the most persuasive view is that proposed by Scrivener, Tregelles and Weiss – the shorter reading was probably an assimilation to Matt 12.39.

Christian and Jewish sources of late antiquity employ ἡ ἐντολή as a term for almsgiving. The development of the locution passes through at least two stages before reaching semantic maturity around the fourth or fifth century. Tobit and Ben Sira record the early notion of charity as a paradigmatic precept, while the Didache attests to a more stabilised and syntactically developed, but still transitional, expression. The use of ἐντολή in 1 Tim 6.14 does not belong to the mature usage, and Test. Ash. 2.8 is a problematic reference point (pace Nathan Eubank). The Didache is more helpful in contextualising the NT evidence.

The significant differences on geographical matters between the Synoptics with their sources and John with its sources – especially the question of Jesus' ‘place’ – should not be resolved simply in favour of Mark. Cana as a place in John is almost as significant as Capernaum in Mark; this is the case in the first century, the gospel narratives and the pilgrim tradition. Both Cana and Capernaum show the continuing vitality of Jewish and Christian communities into the Byzantine period, so that the archaeological investigation of Khirbet Qana will be increasingly significant for historical questions.

Der Versuch, eine sachgemäße Gliederung für eine Schrift der Antike zu finden, hat nicht nur pragmatische Bedeutung, etwa um dem heutigen Leser eine Übersicht über den darin enthaltenen Stoff zu verschaffen. Eine möglichst präzise Gliederung kann zugleich auch eine wichtige Vorklärung über die inhaltliche Zielsetzung der betreffenden Schrift darstellen. Hinsichtlich der Gliederung des Markusevangeliums (MkEv) konkurrieren in der Literatur eine Reihe unterschiedlicher Entwürfe miteinander, die sich jedoch auf zwei klar unterscheidbare Gliederungsprinzipien zurück-führen lassen, auf eine rein geographische Einteilung und eine (mehr oder minder) rein inhaltliche bzw. thematische.

When interpreted in its context in the argument of Galatians, Gal 2.20 is an important part of Paul's discussion of justification by faith. It functions as a depiction of justification apart from any consideration of Jew or Gentile status. This conclusion is based on an examination of the flow of Gal 2.15–21, a consideration of 2.15–21 in its larger context, and a study of 2.20 itself. This role of Gal 2.20 has frequently been overlooked due to inherent difficulties in interpreting the passage and to specific features about the way scholars have interpreted the verse and the larger passage.

This is the first part of a two-part article focused on a fragmentary parchment codex, whose three extant leaves, designated in Leo Depuydt's catalogue as P.MorganLib. 265, are housed at the Morgan Library & Museum in New York. These fragments bear witness to 1 Cor 2.12–3.18; 7.16–30; 15.3–30 in the ‘classical’ variety of Fayyūmic Coptic (dialect F5). Most of these verses have been hitherto unattested in Fayyūmic and thus allow us to attain better insight into the history and text of the Coptic Bible. In the first part of this article, I discuss the codicology of P.MorganLib. 265, its linguistic features, provenance and date.

This article argues that αρραβων in 2 Corinthians (1.22 and 5.5) does not mean ‘down payment’ or ‘first installment’ but ‘pledge’ without any sense of pars pro toto. After showing that the meaning of the word depends on its context, the study goes on to examine the two occurrences of the word, concluding that Paul either appeals to the Spirit as God's pledge for his apostolicity (1.22) or as a pledge for the surety of bodily resurrection (5.5). The common view that αρραβων depicts the Spirit as the present realization of salvation is thus exegetically unfounded.

By means of a contextual analysis of Mark 12.41–4, a narrative analysis of ‘women’ in Mark and a social–historical analysis of the motif of the ‘poor widow’, this article argues that Mark 12.41–4 paves the way for Jesus’ eschatological speech (Mark 13): while the precise purpose of the widow's deposit (ritual, donation or saving) remains an open question, Jesus strengthens her dignity. Mark thus alludes to the ancient motif of respecting personae miserae and shows who Jesus is in light of God's pending judgement of Jerusalem. In its focus on the ‘widow’ motif, the analysis of Mark 12.41–4par. enriches previous studies on form- and redaction-criticism and Realgeschichte by revealing the Christological meaning of the Markan narrative.