Do we find the principle of ‘loving one's enemies’ or precursors thereof in pre-Christian antiquity? In the Greco-Roman tradition we find as a common maxim ‘helping friends and harming enemies’ combined with the talio and the Golden Rule. Only Socrates and some Roman stoics recommend never to take revenge. In the OT Lev 19.18 may possibly be interpreted as a commandment of loving one's enemies. The first to have understood Lev 19.18 in this sense seems to be Jesus. Christians have too rarely lived up to his commandment.

Recent New Testament scholarship has rightly emphasized the significance of urban features at Sepphoris for gospels and Historical Jesus research. However, some of these studies have greatly exaggerated the quantity of evidence for Greco-Roman influence in the first-century city. Most of the architectural features associated with the Greco-Roman city are missing, evidence for use of Greek is minimal, and signs of pagans are rare. In light of this, questions about the influence of Galilee's Hellenistic milieu on the Historical Jesus must be reconsidered.

An archaic form of the sayings collection Free from Anxiety like Ravens and Lilies (Q 12.22b–31) is to be found in P. Oxy. 655, Gospel of Thomas Saying 36. T. C. Skeat detected in 1938 a scribal error already present in Q 12.27a (taken over in Matt 6.28b), but still correct in P. Oxy. 655. Part I publishes Skeat's much more recent reconstruction of Saying 36 in P. Oxy. 655. Robinson had already enlarged Skeat's thesis by focusing attention on four ingredients in Q 12.22b–31 that scholarship has long since recognized as secondary, and that are significantly absent from P. Oxy. 655. Part II responds to criticisms of this thesis by J. Schröter. Part III contains concluding remarks on the archaic form of the sayings collection as a whole.

Les premiers chrétiens recoururent aux noms et aux nombres pour organiser leur pensée théologique. Ce faisant, ils poursuivaient une habitude ancrée aussi bien dans la réflexion philosophique grecque que dans les Écritures hébraïques. Sans développer une ontologie du langage, ils articulaient les mots et les chiffres sur la réalité, laissant à Dieu la responsabilité des équivalences. Le nom de Dieu et le nom de Jésus constituaient, à leurs yeux, le noyau de leur confession de foi.

The parable of the Two Sons occurs in three variant textual forms. Despite the tendency among commentators to follow the Nestle-Aland text, which is based on the Sinaiticus textual form, the strong support in the tradition for each type of variant reading requires the textual question be reassessed. It is argued that although the Sinaiticus reading represents the pre-Matthean form of the parable, it was Matthew, and not a later scribe, who changed the order of the sons in order to privilege the second son. This aligns with the evangelist's concern to depict the rejection and replacement of the Jewish leadership. Yet, although the Vaticanus reading reflects the authentic Matthean form of the parable, the earlier Sinaiticus form resurfaced and intruded itself back into the MSS tradition.

Die Berührungspunkte zwischen den zwei Wundergeschichten Mt 8.5–13 (über den Hauptmann in Kafarnaum) und 15.21–8 (über die kanaanäische Frau) einerseits und dem Herrenwort Lk 4.25–7 (über die Witwe in Sarepta und den Syrer Naaman) andererseits sind so auffällig, daß eine bisher geheime Beziehung zwischen den Matthäustexten und dem Lukastext anzunehmen ist. Genauer: die matthäische Redaktion der zwei Wundergeschichten dürfte von Lk 4.25–7 abhängig sein. Daraus folgt, daß die Zwei-Quellen-Theorie zur Entstehung der synoptischen Evangelien modifiziert werden muß; denn laut dieser Theorie sollte die Gestaltung zweier Matthäustexte nicht vom lukanischen Sondergut (Lk 4.25–7) beeinflußt sein. Wahrscheinlich hat Matthäus das ganze Lukasevangelium gekannt und gelegentlich benutzt. In seiner Illustration des Spruches Lk 4.25–7 durch das Erzählungspaar Mt 8.5–13; 15.21–8 erweist sich Matthäus aber theologisch enger mit Paulus als mit Lukas verwandt.

This paper discusses Galilee–Jerusalem relations in the context of the ‘geography of restoration’ as this is represented in various Jewish writings of the Second Temple period. The literary and archaeological records for the Jewish presence in Galilee in the Hasmonean and Herodian periods are examined against this ideology of a greater Israel. Finally, the alleged opposition in early Christianity between Galilee and Jerusalem is judged to be poorly grounded when various NT documents are read within this larger horizon of meaning.

Paul is the first author of the NT who stresses the central biblical-theological theme of ‘promise and fulfilment’. He is doing so as apostle of the righteousness of God: the One God remains true to Himself as the ‘God of hope’ (Rom 15.13); sending His son to save the world of sinners He says his ‘Yes’ to all He has given in His grace to His people (2 Cor. 1.20), and He creates the eschatological act of redemption which is radically new in opening the Kingdom of God (Rom 14.17). In the horizon of his theology of justification, Paul discovers what God has promised to Abraham; in the horizon of his theology of promise, he discovers what God fulfils in justifying Jews and Gentiles by their faith. Paul's theology, maturing from Galatians to Romans, gives a good measure for Christian talk of promise and fulfilment in dialogue with the Jews.

This survey provides a sort of ‘counterpoint’ to the way in which the history of research has actually gone. In reaction to the ‘Religionsgeschichtliche Schule’, nowadays the Jewish origins of NT Christology are usually pointed out. But when we pay attention to its ‘reception’ in Greco-Roman culture, some of the old findings may still prove useful. This article seeks to check this, taking into account especially the alternative models of explanation offered by the ‘New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule’.

It has long been noted by interpreters that Luke's birth narrative offers a comparative portrayal of Jesus and John, with the effect that Jesus is seen as the greater of the two (a feature of the text commonly called ‘step-parallelism’). Several explanations for this narrative device have been offered by commentators, including the proposal that the step-parallelism serves as an apologetic response to a messianic sect proclaiming John the Baptist as the Christ. This paper argues that while apologetic concerns may play a role, the primary motivation for the contrast Luke composes between the two characters is christological. In short, the point of the step-parallelism is to show that in preparing the way for God, John is really preparing the way for Jesus, because Jesus represents Yahweh in his mission and person.

Den Horizont des Beitrags bilden zum einen die Frage nach dem Verhältnis von Traditionen zu deren Verarbeitung in Texten, zum anderen diejenige nach den methodischen Voraussetzungen historischer Rekonstruktionen. Die methodischen Überlegungen des ersten Teils führen in diese Problematik ein. Aktueller Anlaß, die Thematik an dieser Stelle aufzugreifen, ist ein vor kurzem in dieser Zeitschrift erschienener Beitrag von James M. Robinson und Christoph Heil. In disem gehen sie auf eine von mir geäußerte Kritik an der These ein, mit Hilfe von POxy 655 lasse sich eine bis in die mündliche Phase des Traditionsprozesses zurückgehende Überlieferung erschließen, die darüber hinaus einen schriftlich fixierten Text hinter Q belege. Die Auseinandersetzung über diesen Text zeigt, wie sich in der gegenwärtigen Diskussion exegetische Detailargumentation mit erkenntnistheoretischen und methodischen Prämissen über das Verhältnis von Text und Wirklichkeit verbindet. Sie soll deshalb dazu dienen, die angezeigte Problematik zu illustrieren. Dies wird Inhalt des zweiten Teils sein. Abschließend sollen die notwendigen Konsequenzen im Blick auf die gegenwärtige Debatte um Q und Jesus zusammengefaßt werden.

The Letter to the Hebrews develops a theological topography in which conventional biblical goods are desanctified by means of christological reorientation. The ‘land of promise’ (11.9), the promised rest, the sanctuary of the first covenant, Mount Sinai, are left behind in the shadows of earth whereas all light is shed upon their counterparts in God's heavenly realm, which turns out to be the faithful's true fatherland. This theocentric transformation is ascribable to the author's radical interpretation of επαγγελια: any earthbound hope will look vague because with Christ's ‘new and living way’ (10.20) promise has come to be bright.

Jas 4.5 poses several exegetical difficulties. Particularly elusive has been identifying the ‘scripture’ to which James refers. This article suggests a fresh translation and reading of vv. 5–6. It is argued that vv. 5b–6a constitute an indirect discourse construction. This is grammatically possible and best takes into account the paraenetic context of chapter 4. Further, the two main sections of these verses correspond functionally to the two cola of the quotation from Prov 3.34 in v. 6. Hence, vv. 5b–6a serve as an introductory gloss to the proverb designed to advance James's paraenetic aims.

Luke's physical description of Zacchaeus as ‘short in stature’ is usually given scant attention in the scholarly literature. The reference is illuminated, however, when read in light of the ‘physiognomic consciousness’ that permeated the ancient world and the rhetorical practice of using physical abnormalities, such as shortness, to ridicule one's adversary. This physical characterization joins with the other descriptors of ‘rich’ and ‘tax collector’ to form the derisive image of a Zacchaeus who is traitorous, small-minded, and greedy. But Luke's intention is to reverse these conventional tropes to show that the penitent Zacchaeus is also a ‘son of Abraham’.

Les trois grands discours prononcés par Paul avant son arrestation (Ac 13.16b–41; 17.22b–31; 20.18b–35) tracent de lui une figure narrative évolutive. Effacé derrière la parole de Dieu à Antioche de Pisidie, il se révèle un maître à Athènes; dans les deux cas, il remporte un demi-succès. C’est à Milet que les conditions d’écoute semblent les plus favorables, mais c’est aussi là que sa parole porte le moins. Incompris de ses disciples, comme Jésus, il devient le témoin (μαρτυς) par excellence, bien que sa Passion se termine par un acquittement.

Une rapide comparaison des récits de Marc et de Flavius Josèphe permet de dégager la construction de deux intrigues différentes. Le texte de Marc est ensuite analysé pour dégager l’intentio operis. L’examen de l’organisation du temps met en évidence les anachronies d’un récit où se mêlent analepse et prolepse, et celui de l’intrigue fait voir le chemin emprunté par la violence pour emporter le juste. L’étude de la fonction narrative de Mc 6.14–29 dans l’intrigue globale du second évangile fait notamment ressortir le contraste entre le repas d’alliance de la dernière cène et sa caricature lors du banquet d’anniversaire d’Hérode.

Recent investigation in Paul finds itself in a process of change asking whether there is a centre in Pauline theology and whether the logic of his thought is consistent. The article tries to establish the inner structure of Pauline logic from which the concrete application in different situations has to be distinguished: transformation and participation are the categories which control generally the logic of Pauline thinking. God has transferred the crucified Jesus of Nazareth into a new being/existence, in which the believers and baptised people completely partake by the gift of the Spirit already in the present time. The forensic declarations of justification in Galatians and Romans are rooted similarly in the conception of transformation and participation. These declarations are based on a conception of righteousness which is embedded in baptism.

Contemporary scholars, extending back to Hans Windisch's 1924 commentary on 2 Corinthians, have pointed to parallels between Paul's language of ‘boasting’ in 2 Cor 11–12 and Plutarch's treatise de laude ipsius. But would an ancient reader have made this connection between Paul's letters and discussions about self-praise (περιαυτολογια) in ancient rhetorical and philosophical writings? This paper demonstrates that John Chrysostom, the rhetorically trained Antiochene, did just that, particular in his fifth oration de laudibus sancti Pauli, where he defends Paul's ‘speech about himself’ on precisely the grounds Plutarch allowed for inoffensive boasting in his famous treatise.

Wie auch immer man die Einzelergebnisse ihrer Forschungen zu apokryphen Evangelien beurteilen mag: Aus dem mit den Arbeiten J. D. Crossans und H. Kösters eingeleiteten Paradigmenwechsel in der Beurteilung apokrypher Literatur folgt fast zwangsläufig die Notwendigkeit einer Problematisierung des Kanonverhältnisses ‘neutestamentlicher Apokryphen’. Daraus ergibt sich u.a. die Forderung apokryphe Evangelien zunächst einmal unter Ausblendung von Fragen ihres literarischen Verhältnisses zu Texten des NTs auch an sich als theologische Literatur ernst zu nehmen. Die folgende Untersuchung versteht sich als Beispiel eines derartigen Zugangs. Die genaue Untersuchung der häufig pauschal beurteilten Rolle der ‘Juden’ im Petrusevangelium erweist diese als bei weitem differenzierter gezeichnet, als meistens angenommen wird.

Many parallels in themes, phrases, and motifs have been detected between the Hellenistic–Jewish romance Joseph and Aseneth (JosAs) and the letters of Paul. This article argues that common motifs and also the specific theological profile originate in the same speculative or dualistic branch of wisdom theology. The first part detects wisdom theology as a basic structure of the narrative in JosAs. The second part argues for wisdom theology in Colossians, 1 Cor 1–2 and Phil 3. Paul contrasts wisdom and the cross. However, important motifs are shared by Paul with wisdom theology, and he formulates his Christology as wisdom theology in a dialectic fashion.