L'episode du figuier sterile en Marc 11-12-14 est toujours l'objet de controverses. Jesus s'adresse au figuier et lui dit Que jamais plus personne ne mange de tes fruits! Il faut faire le lien avec Marc 11:20-25 ou Jesus et ses disciples retrouvent le figuier desseche. Il existe une dimension eschatologique dans ce passage. Apres avoir procede a des verifications botaniques, narratives et metaphoriques (correspondance entre le figuier et Israel?), l'A. analyse la tradition de l'episode de Jesus et du figuier chez Marc, Matthieu et Luc
This study addresses the issue of v. 15 in 1 Cor 11:2-16 from the perspective of a veiling custom. If veiling is in view (the position adopted here), then how does one confront the difficulty of reconciling the overall context with the exceptional statement in v. 15 that long hair for a woman is a glory. If, as the text argues, long hair is to be taken as a “glory,” by what logic could a woman understand that she should place a veil upon her head? This article provides a way out of the dilemma by showing how a veil can serve the double function of reflecting the hair's beauty while at the same time preserving a symbol of female modesty.
L'A. fait l'exegese de I Corinthiens 15:1-11 en se concentrant sur les versets 8 et 9 de la pericope. Ce qui l'interesse, en effet, c'est la structure du texte sur laquelle les exegetes ne se sont pas encore mis d'accord. Dans un premier temps, il compte les mots qui composent le passage et meme les syllabes. A partir de ces decomptes, l'A. propose une nouvelle organisation structurelle de la pericope
The well-known reference in these verses to the Word of God as "sharper than a two-edged sword" is often understood by interpreters (and translators) as referring to a fearful instrument of judgment, of punishment, even of execution. This study challenges that assumption, understanding the metaphor differently. The picture the author gives us may more likely be drawn from the medical amphitheater, in which a patient is "stretched out and naked before the eyes" of a benign surgeon who skillfully wields the sharp, scalpel-like blade, carefully dividing sinews from marrow, soul from spirit, thoughts and intentions of the heart. Analysis of the tone of the surrounding context, and the particular language of the pericope itself, leads to the conclusion that this paragraph is positive, rather than negative, in prospect, an encouragement rather than a warning.
The final usage of óo in Heb. 4:12-13, at the very end of the pericope, appears to be closely related to the better-known first occurrence of the term at the beginning of it. Many translations of the phrase ò öv îv óo do not reflect this continuity of subject matter between the two instances of óo. While some translators opt for the commercial idiom, "to whom we must give account," study of that idiom throughout the NT shows that it is untenable. The second "word" is one of response, by the hearer, to the first word.
This article attempts to locate Rom. 10:5-13 within the tension of orality and literacy. There has been a debate concerning the precise nature of the relationship between Lev. 18:5 cited in 10:5 and Deut. 30 cited in 10:6-8. Here it is argued that Paul emphasizes the antithesis between the orality of the Gospel and the literacy of the Torah because he understands himself as living and working in the tradition of the “herald” of Isaiah 52. Against the orality of the Gospel he stresses the literacy of the Torah when he introduces the Leviticus citation with “Moses writes” in 10:5.
L'A. cherche a interpreter Luc 12:13-34 et en particulier le verset 15 qui reste obscur pour bien des commentateurs. Il en eclaire le sens en recourant a Siracide 11:18-19 et au Testament de Judah 18-19. Il s'agit de montrer comment, par la recuperation que Luc fait de ce lieu commun de la rhetorique (topos), le redacteur christianise ce topos en vue de l'instruction morale. L'A. montre aussi en quoi le contexte eclaire le sens du verset 15 : c'est l'occasion de comprendre ce que le Christ condamne vraiment dans la thesaurisation
This article explores the possibility that Paul was using irony in his commendation of the state in Romans 13. It is proposed that the original audience of the letter shared with Paul a common experience of oppression at the hands of the authorities and were aware of the abuses that took place in the opening years of Nero's reign. The consequent implausibility of Paul's language would have alerted his readers to the presence of irony. They would have been able to set aside the surface meaning of the discourse and to recognise that Paul was using the established rhetorical technique of censuring with counterfeit praise. While the passage can be read as a straightforward injunction to submit to the authorities, an ironic reading of the text results in a subversion of the very authorities it appears to commend.
Die matthäische Version der Perikope von Jesu Annahme der Kinder in Mt 19:13-15 ist streng chiastisch gegliedert. Jeder Aussage im ersten Teil (V. 13) korrespondiert ein Wort oder eine Handlung Jesu im zweiten (Vv. 14-15). Mit Hilfe der Textstruktur lässt sich u.a. erklären, warum der Evangelist seine Vorlage um die Erwartung ergänzt, Jesus möge für die Kinder beten, diese Erwartung aber scheinbar nicht einlöst. Die Kindersegnungsperikope erweist sich als konzentrierter Ausdruck matthäischer Theologie: Für Matthäus bilden die durch Jesus vermittelte Kindschaft, die o als Mittel der Kommunikation mit dem Vater und die Basileia eine Einheit.
Three of our oldest witnesses, Origen and P70 from the third century, and Eusebius from the fourth, read N at Mat. 2:23, and this should be accepted as the original, as at 4:13. Matthew is probably inferring the form from his (amended) citation of Jg. 13:5,7, Nîo , on analogy with Iooîo Io. So N is Matthaean, and Luke's use of the Matthaean form at Lk. 4:16 is an indication that he knows Matthew's Gospel. At 26:67-68 Matthew has divided the mockers into two groups. The first spit in Jesus' face, and punch it, and the evangelist therefore suppresses Mark's blindfolding, which would protect Jesus. The second group belabour Jesus with sticks from around and behind; as he cannot see them, the "Prophesy!" taunt is transferred to them, with its explanatory, "Who is it who smote you?" Luke has the same addition of five words in the same order, including a hapax. It is difficult to resist the conclusion here that Luke knew Matthew's Gospel.
Die Rede von der Jungfräulichkeit der 144 000 in Apk 14:1-5 wird durch die im unmittelbaren Kontext genannten Motive Befleckung mit Frauen, Loskauf und Erstlingsfrucht näher konkretisiert, die sich insgesamt zu einem Komplex geschlechtermetaphorischer Aussagen verbinden lassen: Jungfräulichkeit, Makellosigkeit und Nachfolgeversprechen können als Hinweise für den Vorstellungshorizont der Hochzeit gewertet werden, der durch die weiteren Motive präzisiert wird: Die Nicht-Befleckung mit Frauen spielt auf die Enthaltung von Mischehen an, der Loskauf-Gedanke könnte aus der römischen Praxis der Heirat einer freigelassenen Sklavin inspiriert sein, während das Motiv der Erstlingsfrucht den für die jüdische Eheschließung zentralen Aspekt der Heiligung benennt und an eine prophetische Tradition anknüpft ( Jer 2:2-3). Die Funktion aller Aussagen besteht darin, dass die 144 000 fremden Macht- und Besitzansprüchen entzogen werden und ihre enge Zugehörigkeit zum Lamm, dem königlichen Bräutigam, betont wird. Die geschlechtsspezifische Beschreibung der 144 000 rückt die Auserwählten in den Horizont der Braut, so dass die in Apk 19:6-9 bzw. Apk 21:2,9 imaginierte himmlische Hochzeit durch Apk 14:1-5 vorbereitet wird.
From a comparison of Jas 2 : 14-26 with Rom 4-5, Gal 2-3 and Phil 3, it can be concluded that James had knowledge of the Pauline epistles. Nevertheless, we can note some significant differences, which lead us to believe that Jas 2 : 14-26 is a dialogue with Pauline Christians of the second generation. A comparison with Eph 2 : 8-10, 2 Tim 1 : 9 and Titus 3 : 5b-8 confirms this hypothesis. The epistle of James is probably the work of the leader of a Judeo-Christian community who, at a time when Judeo-Christianism was trying to join the main Church, was negotiating membership. He was doing this without compromising his beliefs, particularly when he noted certain deviations within the communities which were influenced by Pauline theology. As a conclusion to this analysis, some thoughts are put forward concerning the christology of James, which is more sophisticated than is usually thought.
In the gospel of Mark (6:14-29) the death of John the Baptist is reported in the most detailed fashion, compared to its synoptic parallels. In fact, this is the only extended story in the second gospel that interrupts the gospel's linear narrative flow by referring to a past event. On the basis of stylistic, structural and narratological observations the present study attempts to illuminate the narrative function and the christological significance of this story by examining the relationship of Mk 6:14-16 to 8:27-29 and 9:9-13, as well as the relationship of 6:17-29 to the Marcan passion narrative. The study concludes that from a narrative, as well as a christological perspective, the second evangelist presents the death of John the Baptist as decisively pointing towards Jesus' passion.
Do not be mismated with unbelievers. For what partnership have righteousness and iniquity? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Beliar? Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will live with them and move among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Therefore come out from them, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch nothing unclean; then I will welcome you, and I will be a father to you, and you shall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty." Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of flesh and spirit, and let us make holiness perfect in the fear of God.
This article re-examines the meaning of the title προσττις given to Phoebe in Rom 16:2—commonly understood in contemporary scholarship as presenting Phoebe as Paul's patron. This position is challenged with reference to recent studies which argue for broadening our understanding of ancient reciprocity beyond the definitions of a patron—client relationship, and also by re-evaluating the semantic range of προσττις/προσττης. It argues that we should see Phoebe and Paul's relationship as working within a general reciprocity dynamic of benefaction, rather than within the specific relationship of the patron-client relationship.
This study challenges the old view, recently championed by John Day, according to which 'A (Rev. 16:16) means the 'Mount of Megiddo' and is a conflation of 'Megiddo' in Zech. 12:11 and the 'mountains of Israel' in Ezek. 38-39. Instead of betraying Zecharian and Ezekielian influence, a closer inspection of the context of Rev. 16:16 points to the Isaian and Jeremian prophecies concerning the destruction of Babylon as a more plausible background of 'A. It is concluded that the solution to the riddle of 'Armageddon' is most likely to be found in the etymological approach and that within this approach, an interpretation of the word as a reference to the "cutting down" of the "mountain" Babylon is perhaps more attractive than other alternatives.
Whereas commentators regularly note that Luke, through Paul, employs ambiguous language at the beginning of his address before the Areopagus in Acts 17, the link between Paul's reference to his audience as δεισιδαιμονεστεροζ in v. 22 and Luke's mention of the Athenians' insatiable curiosity in the preceding verse has gone heretofore unnoticed. This study discusses the popular stereotype of the busybody in Greek and Roman literature and the ways in which it sheds new light on the opening and closing of the speech.
This article examines and evaluates important interpretations of the prepositional series in Rom. 1:17. It evaluates these interpretations in light of four criteria: (1) Is the interpretation consistent with usage of the construction in ancient Greek texts? (2) Does the interpretation address a theme of Romans that is prominent enough to account for its inclusion in the programmatic statement? (3) Is the interpretation consistent with Paul's normal modes of expression? (4) Is the interpretation compatible with the Hab. 2:4 citation? These criteria raise serious doubts about several well-established interpretations and suggest that scholars should more seriously consider the interpretation of Chrysostom and other Greek fathers.
Die apokalyptische Rätselzahl hat nicht nur die Funktion, die historische Rückschau des 13. Kapitels eindrucksvoll abzuschließen; sie ist auch im 17. Kapitel präsent. Dort repräsentiert sie die innere Mitte einer weiteren historischen Reflexion, die nun aber der künftigen Entwicklung des römischen Kaiserreiches gewidmet ist. Der Verfasser sieht die Zeit einer neuen Verfolgung am politischen Horizont heraufziehen und mahnt seine Leser zu illusionsloser Wachsamkeit. Der historische Standort des Verfassers ist die Zeit des Vespasian; sein geographischer Standort ist die Stadt Rom. Nicht nur die kryptische Geographie von Kapitel 17, sondern auch die des 11. Kapitels kann dem Areal dieser Stadt zugeordnet werden.
Das Verständnis des Schriftzitates von Lev 18:5 in Gal 3:12 und Röm 10:5 gibt seit langem Rätsel auf: Wie ist o πoιησας αυτα ζησεται εν αυτoις im Horizont paulinischer Theologie zu verstehen? Dieser Beitrag geht der Frage nach, wie Paulus Lev 18:5 aus seinem ursprünglichen Kontext heraus verstanden haben könnte, und wie er von dort ausgehend das Schriftwort in den Dienst eigener Argumentationen stellen konnte. Von besonderer Bedeutung scheint dabei die präpositionale Wendung εν αυτoις gewesen zu sein, anhand derer Paulus Lev 18:5 mit anderen Schriftstellen kontrastiert (in Gal 3:11-12 mit Hab 2.4: εκ πιστεως; in Röm 10:5-8 mit Dtn 30:11-14: εν τω στoματι σoυ και εν τη καρδια σoυ).
M. Rogland has convincingly questioned the widespread translation of µακροθυµεν in Luke 18:7 by “to delay or tarry which is based on the LXX Version of Sir 35:19. He rightly draws attention to the fact that in that verse µακροθυµεν is used to translate the hithpael of which refers to “restraining or controlling oneself. Unfortunately he does not try to interpret Luke 18:7 along that line. The present article offers a supplement to his article with an interpretation of verse 7 that solves a grammatical problem and fits in perfectly with the context of Luke 18:1-8.
This article investigates the lexical meaning of μακροθυμειν in Luke 18:7 with a view to clarifying whether the verb means “to be patient or longsuffering” or “to delay or tarry”. The former meaning is well-attested in Greek sources, while evidence for the latter is sparse and is primarily supported by appeal to Sir 35:19 , in which μακροθυμειν occurs in parallelism with βραδυνειν. After noting some of the limitations of parallelism as a lexicographical tool, the article examines the underlying Hebrew text of Sir 35:19. The verb μακροθυμειν is used to render the hithpael of ℘ℑℵ, a verb which never indicates a “slowness to act” but rather refers to restraining or controlling oneself. Lexical evidence that μακροθυμειν means “to delay or tarry” is therefore lacking; any sense of a temporal “delay” in Luke 18 or Sir 35 is to be attributed to the larger literary context and not to the semantics of the verb itself.
In 1 Tim 5, the author turns to the church's financial support of some of its members, and in chap. 6 discusses individual attitudes toward money and its use. The article concentrates on chap. 6, especially vv. 17-19, and argues that, while philosophical sources are of prime importance in describing the moral teaching inculcated, popular morality, represented by clichés, proverbs, gnomai, drama, satire and inscriptions, makes possible a thicker description of the moral ecology of the Pastoral Epistles. What emerges is a variety of sometimes similar teaching relating to wealth. The diversity of viewpoint on the same topics relating to wealth suggests that it is more realistic to see 1 Tim 6:17-19 as one among other view-points rather than as derived from one or another of them. What is striking is the prominence given to enjoyment in the proper use of wealth.
In 1 Tim 5, the author turns to the church's financial support of some of its members, and in chap. 6 discusses individual attitudes toward money and its use. The article concentrates on chap. 6, especially vv. 17-19, and argues that, while philosophical sources are of prime importance in describing the moral teaching inculcated, popular morality, represented by clichés, proverbs, gnomai, drama, satire and inscriptions, makes possible a thicker description of the moral ecology of the Pastoral Epistles. What emerges is a variety of sometimes similar teaching relating to wealth. The diversity of viewpoint on the same topics relating to wealth suggests that it is more realistic to see 1 Tim 6:17-19 as one among other viewpoints rather than as derived from one or another of them. What is striking is the prominence given to enjoyment in the proper use of wealth.
At the end of 2 Corinthians 5, in which he is defending his style of ministry, Paul appeals three times to the gospel which he proclaims (vv. 14-15, 18-19, 21). These summaries are worded in ways that indicate the implications of the gospel for his ministry. At the same time, however, what is true of Paul should be true of all believers: they, too, should be living for the one who died and was raised for them (v. 15) and passing on the message of reconciliation to others (vv. 18-19). In the final summary, Christians are said to "become the righteousness of God" (v. 21). Käsemann's understanding of δικαιoσυνη Θεoν here as a reference to God's active power of salvation fits the context well: "in Christ", believers become what he is, and God's righteousness is manifested through them.
The enigmatic phrase in Rev 21:1, “the sea is no more”, has yet to be adequately explained or related cogently to the rest of the book. In this article I categorise the multiple roles in which θαλασσα appears in Rev 4-20 and address the potential implications of each use of sea imagery for explaining its absence from John's vision of the new heaven and earth. Along the way, the various theories that have been proposed by other interpreters are assessed; this is followed by a brief consideration of the potential relevance of several parallels that have been suggested. On the basis of these investigations and an analysis of the context of Rev 21-22, it is proposed that the difficult phrase in 21:1c is best explained in terms of the use of a new-creation typology that serves to highlight the way in which this new creation differs from that described in Gen 1.
In John 21:15 the much-debated expression αγαπας με πλεoν τoυτων; ought to be interpreted "Do you love me more than you love these things?," i.e. all the rest. This conclusion is strongly supported by compelling arguments concerning grammar (primarily the absence of συ as a subject and the frequently attested use of πλεoν τoυτων in the sense of πλεoν η ταυτα [accusative]), Johannine, NT and first-century linguistic usage (in John and the NT nominative personal pronouns are always expressed whenever emphasis lies on them, even when they are not particularly stressed, and in John the only other occurrence of πλεoν + genitive precisely corresponds to πλεoν η + plural accusative neuter pronoun), context and sense, ancient versions of this passage (Latin, Coptic, and Syriac), and some Patristic interpretations.
It is asserted that Matt 26:68|Luke 22:64(|Mark 14:65) is the most difficult of the minor agreements. Some advocates of the two-source theory have addressed this minor agreement by trying to make sense of the narrative as we have it, and others by making sense of the text as we have it (arguing for textual corruption or lost recensions). While some of these arguments are reasonable, in the final analysis they are not satisfying. Although we might remain persuaded that the two-source theory best integrates the data relating to the synoptic problem, this minor agreement reminds us that the synoptic problem is still a problem.
Studies on Paul's Doxa terminology in the Corinthian epistles have either focused on the apostle's allusion to the Moses “glory” tradition in 2 Corinthians 3:4-4:6 or on how the diverse “glory” traditions of the LXX and Second Temple Judaism informed his Christology (1 Cor 2:8). However, Paul's description of the brothers accompanying the Jerusalem collection as the “Doxa of Christ” (2 Cor 8:23) has commanded little attention. Where the phrase has been discussed, it has been understood against the backdrop of the Isaianic “servant” songs (Isa 42, 49, 52-53) and prophecy (60, 62). Alternatively, the text is explained contextually in terms of the brothers promoting Christ's glory (2 Cor 3:18; 8:19).This article proposes that the honorific inscriptions, Dio Chrysostom's Rhodian oration, and the imperial context of “glory” allow us to appreciate better why Paul described his colleagues as the “Doxa of Christ.” In employing the phrase, Paul works within the honorific rhetorical conventions, but upends their eulogistic rationale and imperial focus.
Although not listed in the critical apparatus of Luke 22:41-44 in NA27, P. Oxy. 2383 (P69) is an important early witness to the omission of these verses. Since the publication of the editio princeps in 1957 of this small papyrus fragment, no new editions have appeared. In light of recently completed images, this edition offers several significant new and improved readings, while at the same time confirming that this fragment witnesses the omission of Luke 22:41-44. Based on the new images, it is also apparent that the fragment was subject to subsequent scribal correction in at least two instances.
Thomas Wayment's article improves one important point in the transcription of P69: the reading of Lk 22:45 (recto, l. 4-5). His overall assessment obscures yet the particularities of this small enigmatic papyrus. Wayment misses the fact that P69 attests to a third version of the evidence for the Lukan prayer on the Mount of Olives: he does not consider the absence of Luke 22:42 in P69. This particularity has to be considered in the discussion of the evidence of Lk 22:43-44.
This article announces the public release via the Internet of a full set of interactive digital images of the University of Chicago's "Archaic Mark" (Gregory-Aland ms 2427; University of Chicago ms 972), an enigmatic miniature manuscript of the Gospel according to Mark. To foster further research into this curious illuminated hand-codex, we provide a history of research and critical appraisal of the complex questions involved in its dating—which has been placed as early as the 13th century, and as late as the early 20th century—and a fresh collation of its text, which supplements and corrects the readings heretofore available only in the Nestle-Aland 27th edition.
Comprehensive testing and analysis (microscopic, chemical and codicological) of University of Chicago ms 972-Gregory-Aland ms 2427 confirms that it is a modern production made sometime between 1874 and the first decades of the 20th century.
This article examines the text of an Arabic Gospel manuscript from the “New Finds” at St. Catherine's Monastery, Sinai. It provides a general description of the codex, and then studies two hundred and thirty readings in Saint Luke's Gospel. These readings differ from the Majority Text and agree with some of the earliest Greek witnesses as well as ancient versions. The contribution of this manuscript is shown to be considerable, and a warning against minimizing the textual value of the Arabic versions.
This paper argues that the righteous in Matt 25:31-46 stand out not only by their works of mercy, but also by their attitudes. Comparable descriptions of judgment emphasize the self-confidence of the righteous, based on their own knowledge of their good deeds. In contrast, those acquitted in Matt 25:31-46 are characterized by their ignorance of their own righteousness and their overall inability to help themselves. The passage therefore serves as a fitting conclusion to the teaching on discipleship in the Gospel of Matthew, contrasting the true disciples with the hypocrites (cf. 7:21-23) and bringing together the twin Matthean emphases on the faith of the helpless and the works of the righteous.
The meaning of πιορκ in Matt 5:33 remains uncertain in the NT lexicon of Bauer in English and in major commentaries. This paper traces the problem in Bauer to misreading of punctuation. A re-examination of the evidence establishes that the appropriate meaning is break one's sworn promise, and this is seen to be the meaning Bauer intended.