On s'accorde en général pour penser que Paul a envoyé au moins quatre lettres aux Corinthiens. Avant l'envoi de celle figure qui dans le Nouveau Testament sous le nom de ‘premiére’, Paul en adressa une autre, à laquelle il fait allusion en 1 Co 5.9–11: pouréviter les confusions de numérotation, on peut l'appeler Lettre A. Les Corinthiens ont d'ailleurs répondu à cette lettre, par une missive que Paul mentionne en 1 Co 7.1. Envoyée ensuite, certainement après la réception par Paul de la réponse que les Corinthiens lui ont adressée, existe notre première lettre canonique que l'on peut appeler Lettre B. Cependant, entre la première épître canonique et la seconde, il convient d'en intercaler une autre, qui serait donc au moins la troisième (Lettre C), dont il est fait mention en 2 Co 2.3–9 et 7.8–12. La façon dont Paul en parle la fait communément nommer ‘Lettre dans les larmes’. Quant à la deuxième épître canonique, il convient alors de la situer chronologiquement en quatriréme position, et de l'appeler lettre D.

1.1. Keine menschliche Gemeinschaft kommt ohne ein Ethos aus, das denen, die ihr angehören, ‘mit dem Anspruch von Verbindlich-keit gegeniübertritt’.2 Dies hat seinen Grund darin, daß es aller-erst das gemeinsame Ethos ist, in dem sich die Identität einer Gemeinschaft objektiviert und in dem sie lebensweltlich – nämlich als soziale Identität – wahrnehmbar wird. In diesem Sinne stiftet ein Ethos soziale Kohäsion, denn es bestätigt den einzelnen die Zugehörigkeit zur überindividuellen Gemeinschaft. Mit W. Kluxen kann man darum sagen, daβ die ‘Sozialität’ einer Gemeinschaft ‘im Handeln verwirklicht wird’.3 Dies impliziert, daβ ein Ethos niemals um seiner selbst willen existiert, sondern immer Ver-weisfunktion hat: Es weist über sich selbst hinaus, denn ihm kommt die wichtige Aufgabe zu, die gemeinsame überindividuelle Identität unverwechselbar zu repräsentieren. – Dies gilt selbst-verständlich auch für christliche Gemeinschaften, und darum möchte ich im folgenden danach fragen, wie sich diese Korrelation in den paulinischen Gemeinden und bei Paulus selbst darstellt.4

The Revelation of John presents to its readers a scenario that describes the oppression and persecution of the early Christian communities of western Asia Minor by external pagan forces (specifically, the Roman government). Later Christian tradition tied the Apocalypse to the later years of the reign of Domitian and consequently dubbed that emperor a second Nero. Until relatively recently, this scenario has been affirmed by both the church and the academy. However, mid-twentieth century scholarship successfully challenged the validity of this viewpoint, based upon a review of the historical evidence. Since that time, scholars have scrambled to reconcile the historical world lying behind the Apocalypse with the narrative world presented by the text. Such figures as James A. T. Robinson, Adela Yarbro Collins, and Leonard Thompson have considerably advanced the discussion in our time. However, these recent attempts to detail the relationship between Christianity and pagan society have so dominated the attention of scholars that a serious discussion of the tensions within the Asia Minor Christian communities has been largely neglected. The present study is offered as a partial corrective to this trend.

Mit dem vorliegenden Beitrag sollen einige Beobachtungen zur Rezeption der Genesis durch Pseudo–Philo (Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum)1 und Lukas vorgeführt werden. Beide Autoren arbei–ten im ungefähr gleichen Zeitraum, dem letzten Drittel des ersten Jahrhunderts.2 Auf Berührungen zwischen ihren Erzählwerken wurde bereits früher hingewiesen.3 Der vorliegende Beitrag fragt nach der Bedeutung der Genesis in der Textwelt beider Autoren; er beschränkt sich nicht auf deren explizite Schriftzitate.4 Bezug–nahmen auf die Genesis sind vielmehr in beiden Werken auf vielfältige Weise realisiert. Sie zeigen zugleich lediglich einen Ausschnitt der biblisch bestimmten Intertextualität, die für beide Werke kennzeichnend ist.

‘Und sein Erbarmen (ist) von Geschlecht zu Geschlecht mit denen, die ihn fürchten ()’, heißt es im vierten Vers des Magnificat in Lk 1.50. Wer vom zweiten Buch des Lukas, der Apostelgeschichte, herkommt, fühlt sich unwillkürlich an den heidnischen Hauptmann Kornelius erinnert, der ‘Gott fürchtete mit seinem ganzen Haus’ (Apg 10.2; vgl. 10.22), ebenso an die Worte des Petrus in Apg 10.34f., die ihm und alien Gleichgesinnten gelten: ‘In Wahrheit begreife ich, daß es bei Gott keine Bevorzugung der Person gibt, sondern in jedem Volk ist der, der ihn fürchtet und Gerechtigkeit bewirkt, ihm willkommen.’ Sollte Lukas diese Gottesfürchtigen im Magnificat schon im Blick haben? Diese Vermutung, die in der Sekundärliteratur kaum je Berück-sichtigung findet, verdient es, näher überprüft zu werden.

One of the cruces interpretum regarding the Acts of the Apostles that continue to reappear in scholarly discussions is why some stories are repeated three or more times. Redaction criticism moved the solutions beyond the earlier theories of multiple sources toward a consensus of attributing repetition to Lukan redaction. One contribution from redactional approaches was the awareness of how emphasis is achieved by repeating accounts of events that are especially pivotal to the overall plot of Acts.

Le problème des sources juives de l'Apocalypse de Jean n'est pas nouveau. Leur jaillissement est parfois si vigoureux que l'on a pu tenir l'Apocalypse comme un écrit juif interpolé par un auteur chrétien.1 Ces vues sont maintenant généralement abandonnées, mais l'origine, l'étendue et le caractère des écrits juifs utiliseé par l'auteur de l'Apocalypse restent encore à étudier de façon approfondie. Cette recherche est d'autant plus nécessaire que nos informations sur la littérature intertestamentaire ont été com-plètement renouvelées par les découvertes de Qoumrân. Nombre d'écrits authentiquement juifs, que les grands commentateurs du passeé R. H. Charles,2 W. Bousset3 ou E. Lohmeyer4 ne pouvaient connaître, sont aujourd'hui à verser au dossier. La lecture du Rouleau du Temple, des fragments araméens de la ‘Description de la Jérusalem Nouvelle’, des Chants pour l holocauste du sabbat et du document désormais connu sous le sigle 4QMMT font apparaître les derniers chapitres de l'Apocalypse en particulier sous une lumière toute nouvelle.

Many years ago I watched a television programme on the art of acting. It was a ‘Masterclass’ conducted by Dame Flora Robson. She took a group of Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts’ students, divided them into four separate groups, and then asked each to act out a scene. Each separate cast was given the same script, but, unbeknown to the others, each group was given an entirely different background to the setting of the scene. We then saw the results; four readings, each with the same lines but understood completely differently.

The Epistle of Jude has been one of the most neglected texts in the New Testament, despite its simple structure and its candour. This neglect is partly due to its obscure historical situation.1 In this article, I shall approach the Epistle in a literary perspective in order to lay bare its first setting so that its message and theology can be analyzed more reliably. I contend that when the techniques of communication in Jude are clearly perceived, many typical pitfalls of interpretation will be avoided.

On ne trouvera pas dans les pages qui vont suivre une analyse détaillée du récit de Luc, ni un essai de reconstitution des étapes supposées de sa rédaction. Il nous suffira, dans cet ordre d'idées, de noter que le message adressé aux bergers, comme, du reste, les apparitions angéliques elles-mêmes, relèvent incontestablement d'un procédé littéraire hérité de l'Ancien Testament. Il s'agit, en somme, d'une mise en scène dramatique destinée à sou-ligner l'origine divine d'une intuition, d'une perception des choses qui, dans le cas présent, va âtre au coeur du récit et lui donnera tout son sens. Il n'y a pas lieu de la prendre à la lettre, ni, par conséquent, de se demander si et comment les bergers ont pu entrevoir quelque chose de la signification attribuée par l'ange à la mangeoire et aux langes.

The main focus of this paper is upon just two short verses. They are verses which are interesting, however, partly because they raise questions and relate to debates which are much wider than such a restricted focus might suggest. Like a stone dropped into a pond creating ripples in concentric circles, the exegesis of these two verses is, for me, located within the context of wider debates which, for the sake of openness of method and intention, should briefly be outlined.

A parenetic text from Qumran, which is only unofficially published, refers to ‘the vessel of your bosom’. This passage might shed new light on the enigmatic σκη⋯оς of 1 Thess 4.4.

The passage in question belongs to one of the admonition sections of Sapiential Work A from Qumran. Sap. Work A is a sapiential composition preserved in seven fragmentary copies, one from Cave 1 (1Q26) and six from Cave 4 (4Q415/416/417/418a/418b/423). Six copies display early Herodian script (30 BC – 20 AD), while one (4Q423) represents a late Herodian hand (1 – 50 AD). The high number of copies and the fact that this book was being copied even until a late stage in the history of the Qumran settlement shows that it was highly regarded within the Essene Community.

The occurrence of the phrase in 4QMMT had already been exciting comment for some years prior to the official publication of the scroll fragments. In one of the first reflections on the official publication, Martin Abegg has suggested that Paul's use of the same phrase, ἔργα ν⋯μον, in Galatians and Romans (Gal 2.16; 3.2, 5,10; Rom 3.20, 28) indicates that Paul was ‘rebutting the theology of documents such as MMT … that Paul was reacting to the kind of theology espoused by MMT, perhaps even by some Christian converts who were committed to the kind of thinking reflected in MMT’. As we shall see below, Abegg has given some further reasons for seeing a parallel or even connection between the thought of 4QMMT and Paul's argumentation in Galatians in particular, but even he does not seem to have appreciated all the points of possible connection. At this early stage in assessing the significance of 4QMMT for New Testament study (‘nothing short of revolutionary’, concludes Abegg), it may be of value simply to summarize what these points of possible connection amount to.

New Testament textual critics customarily discuss scribal errors under two headings: intentional errors and unintentional, accidental, or involuntary errors. Intentional errors are those made deliberately in order to improve or correct the text and involve corrections made to spelling or grammar, harmonisation to other passages (whether in the immediate context, in a parallel passage, or in an Old Testament source), and liturgical or theological enhancement. These might all be traced to the conscious activity of the scribe.1 Unintentional errors, on the other hand, can be distinguished (in theory at least) as arising not from conscious scribal activity but from involuntary mistakes of eye, ear, memory, judgment, pen or speech.2 These errors involve accidental additions, especially dittography (writing twice something that is only once in the exemplar), omissions, either by haplography (writing once something that is twice in the exemplar) or through homoioteleuton (a confusion due to similar endings of words or lines in the exemplar), or other sorts of confusions of letters or words.3

There are two well-attested readings of Rev 22.14, the seventh and final blessing in the book. The reading accepted in the UBS 4th edition is , ‘Blessed are those who wash their robes’ (RSV). Most twentieth-century NT editions, including Nestle-Aland, and most commentators agree with the UBS. But, in my view, the original text is the other well-attested reading, , ‘Blessed are those who do his commandments’ (footnote in RSV). The manuscript attestation and versional evidence is not decisive for either reading, but patristic references, literary analysis, and consistency with the worldview in Revelation all favour the reading .