Several recent studies have proposed that according to Paul gentiles join Abraham's lineage in a quasi-physiological way by being infused with material πνɛῦμα. This article assesses that proposal, finding it to be an inaccurate description of Paul's language and rationale, and sets forth an alternative proposal based on Romans 4 and Paul's descriptions of baptism. This alternative proposal is that Paul understood the forging of an Abrahamic and divine pedigree for gentiles to be a divine act of creation from nothing, that is concomitant with believers’ proleptic death and resurrection in solidarity with the messiah.

First Peter 1.3–2.10 weaves a new familial and ethnic identity for believers through a complex series of interlocking metaphors. How does this identity influence the ethical exhortation beginning in 2.11? The current article argues that an answer is found in the Greco-Roman structures of exemplarity. First, the article identifies four explicit markers of exemplarity discourse in 1 Peter: ὑπογραμμός (2.21), the footsteps idiom (2.21), the term ἀντίτυπος (3.21) and the term τύποι (5.3). Next, it surveys how exemplarity functioned in the Greco-Roman world. Greek and Roman literature demonstrate a clear preference for domestic exempla. Similarly, as a new family and ethnic group, Christian believers require new exempla suited to their new Christian identity. In this light, 1 Peter's ethical instruction can be more deeply appreciated. Finally, this article investigates how exemplarity dynamics illuminate Jesus as exemplar par excellence in 1 Peter. First Peter depicts Jesus’ passion with language of the Isaianic suffering servant (2.22–5). Jesus’ exemplarity is given to slaves, who are implicitly held up as models for all believers. Exemplarity thus draws its strength from the past (the suffering servant, Jesus) as it challenges those in the present and future (slaves, all believers) to become like these models.

On the basis of Pierre Nora's theory of generations, this article re-examines the relationship between Luke's work and the so-called ‘Pastoral Letters’. From this perspective, informed by the sociology of memory, the article analyses the affinities between these two traditions not as the traces of a community of author(s), but rather as the expressions of a memorial consciousness under construction: that of a foundational past identified with the generation of the apostles.

The Gospel of Thomas (GThom) is a collection of sayings, most of which come with the stereotypical introduction ‘Jesus said: …’ The GThom thus looks like a loose collection of disparate material. However, several sayings in the collection are introduced by ‘He said: …’, thus omitting explicit reference to Jesus as the speaker. This points to greater (narrative) coherence: when the speaker's name is missing in a logion, the logion depends on the surrounding context and ceases to be a self-contained unit. This article views the GThom as a sayings collection on the way to becoming a literary composition titled ‘The Gospel according to Thomas’.

This article defends the salience of situating Christ worship in the context of urban neighbourhoods and identifies some historical problems in conceptualising belonging at that level of society, akin to similar work on other levels of society such as the household and polis. An ekklēsia or collegium is, like all neighbourhood structures, capable of fostering or delimiting social interactions among neighbours who identify differently. A case study of 1 Cor 14.22–5 illustrates how Paul's model ekklēsia functioned in the context of the neighbourhood, and considers the impact of adding the ekklēsia to the street on which it was located.

This article seeks to explain Matthew's description of Joseph as righteous (δίκαιος) by investigating Matt 1.18–25 within its ancient context, especially Judean practices of marriage and divorce as illuminated by Judean legal papyri from the Dead Sea region in the first and second centuries ce and from the Judean politeuma of Herakleopolis in the mid-second century bce. The examination will demonstrate the importance of these papyri for understanding the narrative in Matt 1.18–25 in its original social setting where honour was a dominant value, especially the extent to which it reveals Joseph to be an exemplar of Matthean righteousness.

This article will examine the parodic characterisation of the image of the beast (Rev 13.15) who mimics the two witnesses (11.3–12) from a literary perspective. There is evidence of this mimicry based on the appearance of the textual markers, εἰκών and πνεῦμα. This study will examine parody in relation to other parodic characterisations that appear in the Apocalypse.

In 1963, New Testament Studies published an article by Pierson Parker in which he argued that the commonalities of the Third and Fourth Gospels result from direct contact between their respective authors. This article strengthens Parker's case. It highlights additional patterns of commonality between the two Gospels. It demonstrates that these areas of commonality align with events in the Fourth Gospel allegedly experienced by the Beloved Disciple. It considers the best explanation of this phenomenon.

Jesus’ hyperbolic saying that ‘it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven’, present in the synoptic tradition (Matt 19.24; Mark 10.25; Luke 18.25), has long been subject to the suggestion that the ‘eye of a needle’ does not refer to an actual needle but is the name of a small gate in the Jerusalem wall. Today, most biblical scholars are convinced that this theory is incorrect, but no study identifies the sources of the error and traces the history of this myth. This note focuses on tracking the origins of the flaw and points specifically to the sources of the misconception that the term ‘eye of a needle’ should not be taken literally.

The earliest note that mentions a gate called the ‘eye of a needle’ seems to be a gloss attributed to Anselm of Canterbury (11th cent.). This gloss can be found in the thirteenth-century work of Thomas Aquinas Catena aurea. What is false, however, is the oft-repeated belief that the source of the information is the eleventh-century Gospel Commentary of Theophylact.