Showing papers in "New Testament Studies in 1967"

Dying and Rising with Christ

Abstract: The relation of the so-called ‘mystical’ to the so-called ‘juridical’ aspect of Paul's theology has been frequently discussed. While Albert Schweitzer thought that the doctrine of justification by faith was no more than a ‘side-crater’ in the Pauline theology, Rudolf Bultmann considered the idea of a participation in the destiny of Christ a Gnostic influence not really fitting into the Pauline pattern of thought. This disagreement is not of merely historical interest; behind it lies the central theological problem of the significance of Jesus' life, death and resurrection for us today. Is this significance to be expressed in the categories of an example to be followed or a forerunner, who opens the way ahead for us, or are the categories of sacrificial or vicarious death more adequate? At first sight, the two patterns seem to contradict each other. According to the first, the believer dies with Christ; Christ's death becomes the believer's death; according to the second, Christ dies under the curse of divine judgement, lest the believer undergo this judgement. However, the first observation that we make in the Pauline texts is the coincidence of both lines in the same sentence: II Cor. v. 14: ‘One has died for all; therefore all have died’; I Thess. v. 10: ‘Christ died for us so that whether we wake or sleep we might live with him.’

The Paraclete in the Fourth Gospel

Abstract: In recent years much literature has been devoted to this topic. If still another discussion can be justified, it is on the grounds that many of the best insights have not been brought together and that perhaps now we may be in a position to draw a larger picture that will represent a certain consensus.

A Primitive Version of Luke in the Composition of Matthew

Abstract: My purpose here is to suggest the possibility that Matthew used Mark and a primitive version of Luke in the composition of his Gospel. Although I can only point to some thematic and structural patterns, I find that both word studies and detailed analysis of passages support this possibility. The hypothetical primitive version of Luke resembles what we know of Marcion's Gospel both in content and in arrangement. It consists of the bulk of the material in Luke between the pericopes on John the Baptist and the Passion narrative, inclusive. It contains all the Marcan material in Luke, all the material common to Matthew and Luke, and much of the material peculiar to Luke. I shall refer to it as ‘Primitive Luke’.

Christian Origins in Jewish Tradition

Abstract: Scholars who set out to clarify a particular issue can proceed along one of two different lines: either they can scrutinize the existing sources critically or they can compass land and sea to discover new sources. As the former procedure is the established one so far as Christian origins are concerned and as it is indeed advisable since the New Testament sources are something apart, it may easily be understood that some more radical minds should venture to explore the other course. Voltaire was one of these. He urged his correspondent to consult the Jewish Toledoth Jeshu as they stem from the first century and contain ‘des choses beaucoup plus vraisemblables que dans nos evangiles’. Other men followed in his steps. But attempts to write a history of Jesus based on the Jewish reports and centred on details related by them—attempts made by some rare birds of the last century—were bound to prove unsuccessful. Jewish scholarship was quick to realize this and to dissociate itself from the Toledoth (and other material) as from absurdities or a ‘Schmarren’—something like a penny-dreadful—not worth looking at. There the matter rested.

Law in the New Testament: The Parable of the Prodigal Son

Abstract: Luke xv. 11–32, an elaborate, circumstantial, in fact the longest, parable, calls now for the endeavours of a symposium. This paper cannot do more than open the legal aspects, which have already been handled by Professor David Daube and Professor Jean Dauvillier, and the symbolic aspects, which have been ignored. A complete investigation of the symbolism is not to be looked for until the midrashic links between the parable and its associated passages in Deuteronomy have been expounded by an expert in the technique of delivery of sermons amongst the Jews. Our parable's place in a lectionary cycle has been identified, and the implications of this also must be brought out: in part these will overlap with the work just alluded to, and in part they will reveal the early church's view of the parable's implicit significance. This work, however, will relate to the stage at which the parable became a written document, and to its worth for those who first used it in liturgy. This paper is concerned with Jesus’ own meaning, so far as we can rediscover it from the shape and content of the parable in the light of contemporary attitudes. Though this means covering ground already covered often, and much current exegesis will be confirmed, there is more by way of subtle statement and even more subtle contention in the parable than could have been realized before. Close studies of the vocabulary from Wetstein to J. Jeremias do not help us much at this stage of refinement; but it is interesting to note that in Jeremias's view, well substantiated as to the greater part of the parable, traces of the semitic origin of the document before us are visible throughout.

Oikonomia-Terms in Paul in comparison with Lucan Heilsgeschichte

Abstract: The term ‘ Heilsgeschichte ’ reminds one a little of the state of affairs in Israel when there was no king: everyone understands it ‘as seems right in his own eyes’. In part this variety of understandings arises because the Bible itself has varied views and emphases about history and salvation, but also in part because scholars have a variety of emotional responses and intellectual understandings with regard to the term ‘ Heilsgeschichte ’, itself a word which has been with us as a technical term for roughly a century and a half—that is, during the whole period of modern critical Bible study. To complicate matters, there are related concepts which often colour our understandings of the term—for example, ‘stewardship’ and ‘dispensationalism’, particularly in the English-speaking world; and the notion of an ‘economy of God’, wherever the patristic tradition weighs heavily in biblical studies.

‘Verba Christi’ in I Peter: Their Implications concerning the Authorship of I Peter and the Authenticity of the Gospel Tradition

Abstract: The Epistle of I Peter has occupied a rather large place in recent critical studies of the New Testament. E. G. Selwyn has advanced the view that the epistle draws from four primary sources: a liturgical document, a persecution fragment, a primitive Christian catechism, and verba Christi. E. Lohse prefers to think that the early church had a common stock of oral paraenetic tradition, from which the epistolary writers drew. F. W. Beare has popularized in English the liturgical-homiletical hypothesis widely accepted in Europe, namely, that the major part of I Peter (i. 3–iv. 11) is the transcription of a baptismal liturgy-homily, transformed into an epistle by the addition of i. 1 f. and iv. 12–v. 14. The view has been carefully worked out by F. L. Cross, but has encountered increasing resistance.

The Priestly Messiah

Abstract: The relationship between the priestly and the regal functions is a question of much interest and importance among peoples in the most diverse parts of the ancient world. The union of these two functions in the person of the king seems to have been quite usual. The origin of this is to be sought in the conduct of family worship by the head of the family, and then by the leader of the larger group or tribe. When a professional priesthood arises, the king (as in Assyria and Egypt) commonly remains the chief priest, even though he may in practice officiate only on rare occasions. Among the Hebrews also the king on occasion exercised his priestly functions.2 But alongside him was the high priest, whose influence steadily grew, especially after the exile, when the nation was as much a church as a state, with its hereditary high priest who, in the absence of a king, came to enjoy an authority and prestige unparalleled before. It might have been expected that the replacement of kings by high priests and the subsequent enhancement of their position would eventually have wrought a transformation in the traditional messianic expectations. The remarkable fact is that this did not take place. The tendency for the kingly and priestly prerogatives not to be vested in one person is persistently projected into the picture of the eschatological hope.

A Sign for Unbelievers: Paul's Attitude to Glossolalia

Abstract: In this paper there are three related concerns: first, to attempt an interpretation of I Cor. xiv. 20–5 against the background of Peter's activity in Corinth; secondly, recognizing the polemical nature of this passage and of the whole of I Cor. xii–xiv, to discuss the application of these chapters to modern Pentecostal phenomena; and, thirdly, to examine the conclusions of J. C. Hurd, 1 which in both respects tell against mine.

Das Lamm Gottes

Abstract: Das auf den Prolog folgende Fragment des Evangeliums nach Johannes spricht uber Johannes den Taufer. Dieses Fragment besteht aus zwei Teilen. Der erste dessen Inhalt uns die Person Johannes des Taufers vorstellt, erzahlt von seinem Zeugnis vor den Abgesandten des Hohen Rates. Der zweite Teil des Fragments enthalt das Zeugnis seinen Schulern gegenuber, und den Bericht von der Berufung der Schuler Christi. Hier wird auch definiert, wer Christus eigentlich ist.

Paul: ΣОФОΣ and ПNΕΥΜΑΤΙΚΟΣ

Abstract: The first two chapters of I Corinthians are an important source for illuminating Paul's understanding of his missionary proclamation and teaching. The evidence is, however, by no means unambiguous and has been variously assessed. At one extreme stands a view such as that of Hans Windisch, who believes that Paul's christology here, as elsewhere, has been decisively influenced by Jewish wisdom teaching. Completely in the opposite direction goes the recent work of Ulrich Wilckens, who rejects any essential relationship between Paul and wisdom theology. Wilckens's studies represent a prominent tendency in recent scholarship and well merit more detailed exploration than the outline that is possible here. According to this scholar the Corinthian opponents are gnostics. Their wisdom is derived not from Greek rhetoric but from a revelatory theology whose chief offence to Paul is that it denies significance to the cross. Yet in the crucial section, I Cor. ii. 6–16, Paul himself would almost appear to be the gnostic, so similar are his words and ideas to gnostic views. The apostle's language here stems, however, from the Corinthian theology, not from his own characteristic thought. What Paul intends to do is in fact to attack the gnostic christology; but since he actually shares many ideas with the gnostics, this section, despite its intent, could actually be taken entirely in the gnostic sense. The paradoxical result of Wilckens's argument is that in those sections where Paul describes the Corinthian wisdom, one finds only Paul's derogatory and inaccurate judgement, while in the section where Paul would seem to be speaking of his own wisdom teaching, one can see the real view of the Corinthians.

The Authorship of ‘The Gospel According to Matthew’:. A Reconsideration of the External Evidence

Abstract: Until the latter half of the eighteenth century, the apostolic authorship of ‘the Gospel according to Matthew’ seems to have been generally accepted. But questions and doubts began to arise from different points of view in the examination of what were regarded as the relevant documents; and it would be a reasonable assessment of the general opinion of current scholarship to say that, whilst it may be agreed that Matthew is probably in some sense behind the Gospel that bears his name, there are few, if any, who would claim for him complete responsibility for the work. Yet, in the second, third and fourth centuries of the Christian era, the authorship of Matthew was not merely unquestioned: it was repeatedly and positively affirmed. These affirmations, however, have been subjected to close scrutiny, and even the basic declaration of Papias of Hierapolis, a declaration that belongs to the earlier part of the second century, has been used to refute the claim to apostolic authorship. It is the purpose here to examine the early evidence again, in the hope of finding some solid ground in the critical morass where so many seekers are apt to lose their way.

Merkmale der Kirche nach dem Neuen Testament

Abstract: Die folgenden Ausfuhrungen wollen nicht das Verstandnis der Kirche bzw. der Gemeinde (von dem Ineinander beider im Neuen Testament wird spater zu sprechen sein) nach den Schriften der Urchristenheit in extenso erarbeiten. Dazu bedurfte es einer umfanglichen Monographie, sowohl angesichts der vielfaltigen Beziehungen der Verkundigung des Neuen Testaments insgesamt zu der Gegebenheit ‘Kirche’ wie im Blick auf die umfangliche Debatte schon allein uber die Begriffe ἐκκλησία und σ⋯μα in der Fachliteratur (auf die ausdruckliche Auseinandersetzung mit ihr mus verzichtet werden). Es soll genug sein, auf entscheidende Kennzeichen der Kirche (bzw. der Gemeinde) hinzuweisen, wie sie sich u. a. aus ihren Benennungen und deren Kontext (II), aber auch aus bestimmten Aussagen sonst erge ben.

Das Johannesevangelium als hermeneutische Frage

Abstract: Die Frage nach dem hermeneutischen Grundansatz der Exegese beschaftigt heute viele Theologen. Symptomatisch ist die Diskussion uber das Problem ‘historischer Jesus und kerygmatischer Christus’, in die vornehmlich Exegeten verwickelt sind. 2 Die Auseinandersetzung droht sich innerhalb der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft zu einer Methoden- und Grundlagenkrise auszuweiten. Eine solche Entwicklung ist aber auch ein Zeichen fur die heutige Gesamtsituation in der Theologie und kann ein forderlicher Prozes sein, der die Exegeten zwingt, uber ihren engeren Fach- und Forschungs bereich, die historisch-kritische Auslegung der Bibel, hinauszublicken und sich uber die Voraussetzungen und Konsequenzen ihrer Arbeit Rechenschaft zu geben. Wenn wir uns nur um die philologische Erklarung der Texte mit allen implizierten Fragen der Textkritik und Textgeschichte, der Zeit und Umwelt des Neuen Testaments, des religionsgeschichtlichen Vergleichs, der Philologie und Archaologie kummerten, waren wir keine Theologen mehr. Heute sehen wir deutlicher als im vorigen Jahrhundert mit seinem Leitbild einer moglichst ‘objektiven’ oder ‘neutralen’ Wisscnschaft, das die Auslegung alter, besonders philosophischer und religioser Texte weit mehr erfordert als die Anwendung philologischer und historisch-kritischer Methoden. Wir konnen eine historisierende Exegese, die den Text nach dem auserlich erkennbaren Sinn erklaren und historische Tatbestande feststellen will, und eine weiterreichende theologische Interpretation unterscheiden, die den fur uns als glaubige Christen bedeutsamen Sinn herausstellen und uns in unserem Mensch- und Christsein, vielleicht fragend und herausfordernd, treffen will. Wir konnen aber dieses zweifache Bemuhen nicht sauberlich scheiden; wir konnen weder bei der kritischen Forschungsarbeit unsere Stellungnahme als Mensch und Christ verleugnen noch als glaubige Christen die Ergebnisse kritischer Untersuchung ignorieren.