Showing papers in "New Testament Studies in 1977"

Paul and the People of Israel

Abstract: To understand the Apostle Paul's attitude to his own people, it is necessary to place it in the perspective of his interpretation of the Gospel as a whole. Two main approaches to this have been taken. There are those who see Paul's point of departure in his conviction that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah and in the transformation of the understanding of the messianic condition which this demanded. Others point out that in his epistles Paul seems to be most concerned, not with the messiahship of Jesus, but with the criticism of the Law, that Paul's call (misnamed a ‘conversion’) arose from a new insight into the meaning, function and weakness of the Law (and with this, the insight into the nature of the self), not from a new concept of messiahship. They claim that Judaism, always tolerant of diversity of belief even in messianic claimants, could absorb Paul's paradoxical doctrine of a crucified Messiah but could not overlook Paul's acceptance of Gentiles, sinners who did not observe the Law, as members of the people of God. This passed the limits of Jewish tolerance and brought down upon the Apostle the wrath of his own people. The two positions indicated are too polarized. The immediate cause of the Jewish opposition to Paul centred in the Law. But his understanding of the Law was inextricably bound up with the significance which he had come to ascribe to Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah and with the challenge that this issued to all the fundamental symbols of Jewish life. To isolate the criticism of the Law from the total messianic situation as Paul conceived it is both to exaggerate and to trivialize it. That criticism was a derivative of the place which Paul ascribed to Jesus as the Messiah.

II Corinthians vi. 14–vii. 1 and Food offered to Idols

Abstract: The problems surrounding the integrity of II Corinthians vi. 14–vii. I are well known. In the first place, verses vi. 11–13 and vii. 2–4 flow together rather easily as a single piece of personal appeal. ‘My heart is opened wide toward you…In a like reciprocation, I speak as to children, you also open wide (your hearts toward me)…Make room for me.’ The parenesis of vi. 14–vii. I abruptly breaks this flow of thought. Moreover, vi. 14–vii. I is a self-contained unit, which begins with a concrete prohibition supported by five balanced rhetorical questions, which in turn is supported by a catena of Old Testament passages, and concludes with a general parenesis. Nothing within this passage seems even remotely related, either in language or concept, to the personal appeal within which it is embedded.

The Role of the Disciples in Mark

Abstract: While traditional Christian thought has honoured the disciples, they have since Wrede been increasingly regarded as bearing the brunt of Mark's animus. This paper is a new examination of the role they play in Mark's thought. It is not inappropriate to present it at a meeting of the Society in the U.S.A., where so much original and fascinating work on the place of Mark as author has been advanced in recent years. It may be that Mark did not conceive of the disciples as playing any particular role. In the tradition their lives were too closely intertwined with that of Jesus for Mark to have been able to omit them from his account. Given their necessary presence he might have regarded them purely as background, an ineradicable part of the scenery but of no importance in themselves and having no essential function in what he wrote. We will not dispute this now, but all that is argued later about the disciples indicates that they were not mere scenery; Mark gave them a definite role in his book. But what role? This is a legitimate question and needs to be asked once we abandon the view that Mark is writing pure biography.

Paul, James and the Apostolic Decree

Abstract: The problem of the original setting of the Apostolic decree (Acts xv. 20, 29, xxi. 25) is still with us, in spite of the epoch-making and powerfully influential work of M. Dibelius and E. Haenchen on Acts xv as a whole. After analysing that chapter in detail, Dibelius concluded that the Decree stemmed from pre-Lukan documentary tradition but denied that the events described by Paul in Gal. ii. 1–10 could be the setting for the creation of the tradition Haenchen went still further, endorsing Dibelius' reservations about source criticism and veering decisively towards the view that Luke himself, dependent no doubt upon a contemporary and non-literary tradition, was responsible for the material He too disputed any connection with Gal. ii. 1–10 and followed C. von Weizsacker in tracing the Decree to an attempt to cement together Jewish/Gentile Christian relations, certainly later in time than the controversy in Antioch described in Gal. ii. 11–14. The history of research into this problem during the last few decades has shown a quite remarkable degree of unanimity in accepting two basic conclusions: (I) Lukan theology is quite sufficient to explain the presence of the Decree in the Acts narrative of the so-called Apostolic Council, i.e. Luke's view that Gentile converts participate in that true Judaism set out by Moses and fulfilled in Jesus, provided they respect the law. (2) The Decree is the product of a process of conciliation. While scholars disagree as to whether Jerusalem was involved in the process, it is widely agreed that the conciliation was in time later, not earlier, than the clash in Antioch.

Modern Developments of Griesbach's Hypothesis

Abstract: To refer to ‘modern developments’ of Griesbach's hypothesis makes clear that the present revival of interest in Griesbach's work is not simply an uncritical return to the past. For example, Griesbach accepted the traditional view of Augustine that Luke used Matthew even as he broke with tradition in affirming that Mark came after Luke as well as after Matthew. To the extent that Griesbach assumed Luke's use of Matthew while never discussing the relationship between those two gospels, his solution to the synoptic problem, for over a century and a half, remained in what must be judged as a critically undeveloped condition. Contemporary advocates of the Griesbach hypothesis have been obliged to explain the relationship of Luke to Matthew and in other ways develop a more convincing explanation of this hypothesis. This essay gives an account of the progress that has been made during the past twelve years in clarifying the merits of Griesbach's solution to the synoptic problem. In answering some of the objections that have been raised against this solution, an effort has been made to advance the discussion even further toward a more adequate resolution of this important question. The Epilogue includes some clarifying statements on the argument(s) from order.

I Peter II. 1–10: its Formation and Literary Affinities*

Abstract: Despite the relative neglect shown the First Epistle of Peter, few NT books are more relevant for a study of the use of the OT in the NT Like the Epistle to the Hebrews, I Peter quotes frequently from various sections of the OT, and like the Book of Revelation its thought is frequently framed with OT expressions Especially because of the unique collection of stone testimonia and the use of other OT quotations, I Peter ii 1–10 is one of the most intriguing passages in the NT As is well known, I Peter provides a message of consolation and exhortation to Christians who were being or were about to be persecuted, and this message is conveyed by a series of imperatives based on indicatives Particularly in i 13 through ii 10 the imperative is couched between a preceding assumption (expressed either by a conditional sentence as in i 17 or a participle as in i 22) and a following supporting indicative

Synoptic Parousia Parables and the Apocalypse

Abstract: In the continuing discussion of the possible role of Christian prophets in the formation of the tradition of the words of Jesus, reference continues to be made to the relevance or irrelevance of the words of the exalted Christ transmitted by the prophet John in the Apocalypse. They remain the only un-disputed example from the first century of prophetic utterances made in the name of Christ in the first person, and for advocates of the creative activity of the Christian prophets they are therefore invaluable evidence that such utterances could be made. Their use as evidence for the role of prophecy in the formation of the Synoptic tradition involves, admittedly, additional assumptions not easily demonstrable. We must suppose that John's prophecy is typical of the content of early Christian prophecy in general, and also that this late first-century work is faithfully representative of the earlier prophets whom alone we can suppose to have been responsible for originating logia which actually entered the Synoptic tradition. The uniqueness of John's prophetic status vis-a-vis that of the church prophets has been cogently argued by D. Hill, and it seems that at least we cannot infer otherwise un-attested characteristics of early Christian prophecy in general from the contents of the Apocalypse alone. In any case the Apocalypse is surely untypical in being a lengthy and closely integrated literary composition, with its own distinctive stylistic traits. Partly for this reason the words of Christ reported in it are for the most part quite unsuitable for transference to the lips of the Jesus of the Synoptic tradition, at least without substantial adaptation.

Torah Citations in the Synoptics

Abstract: The Old Testament citations have offered a fertile field for study and investigation because of their interesting text forms. In particular, the surprising fact that over half of the Old Testament citations attributed to Jesus completely conform to the LXX text has led investigators to seek an explanation for this phenomenon. Some have tried to show that the original citations in Hebrew or Aramaic have been assimilated to the LXX in the course of tradition, while others have attributed this phenomenon to the Gospel writers who used the LXX text familiar to them.

A Straussian Question to ‘New Testament Theology’

Abstract: David Friedrich Strauss died on 8 February 1874. His Leben Jesu of 1835 was said by Albert Schweitzer to be ‘no mere destroyer of untenable solutions, but also the prophet of a coming advance in knowledge’, namely eschatology. The claims that it ‘has a different significance for modern theology from that which it had for his contemporaries’ and that it ‘marked out the ground which is now occupied by modern critical study’ appear even more true in the light of subsequent history of religions and form-critical research than Schweitzer himself realized. But as well as marking an epoch in the historical critical study of the New Testament, this book, and with it the fate of its author, remains a symbol of something else: the tension between historical research and the formation of a systematic or doctrinal theological position. Ecclesiastical authorities have in the meantime learned to live with theological pluralism and become more tolerant, but the problem itself has not disappeared. The investigation and development of Strauss' generally unappreciated contribution is perhaps an appropriate centenary celebration.

La Question Littéraire de Hébreux xiii. 1–6

Abstract: Le brusque changement de ton que l'on observe, dans l'epitre aux Hebreux, entre les dernieres phrases du ch. xii et les premieres du ch. xiii a porte certains exegetes a contester l'authenticite du ch. xiii et a considerer celui-ci, en tout ou en partie, comme un morceau heterogene, ajoute maladroitement au beau discours de Heb. i–xii. D'autres auteurs se sont mis en peine de defendre l'authenticite du chapitre, mais, comme il arrive dans les controverses, ils sont restes tributaires de la facon dont le probleme avait ete pose: le ch. xiii continue pour eux a constituer un morceau a part, que l'on peut etudier separement. C'est ainsi que deux monographies recentes, dont les auteurs prennent position en faveur de l'authenticite d'Heb xiii, considerent cependant ce chapitre comme une unite litteraire distincte et le prennent comme sujet d'etude.

La Réduction du Pluriel au Singulier dans l'ÉVangile et la Première Lettre de Jean

Abstract: Pauvrete des moyens d'expression, richesse des effets: parmi tous les ecrits du Nouveau Testament, c'est dans le quatrieme evangile que cette reussite est la plus visible. Comment en rendre compte? Par le genie de l'evangeliste qui, ne disposant que d'un instrument linguistique sommaire, s'en est servi habilement. Discernement des temps, emploi du verbe au debut de la phrase, casus pendens, repetitions adversatives, chiasmes: ces particularites ont ete signalees, en fonction du probleme relatif a la langue originaire du livre, grecque ou arameenne, et consequemment du milieu culturel (Mutterboden) ou il vit le jour.

Situation et Signification de Hébreux v. 1–10

Abstract: Les commentateurs de l'epitre aux Hebreux sont unanimes a reconnaitre l'importance particuliere des dix premiers versets du chapitre v, texte qui presente d'abord une description du sacerdoce (v. 1–4) et en precise ensuite l'application au Christ (v. 5–10). L'attention des exegetes, cependant, ne s'attache guere a l'interpretation d'ensemble de ce passage, elle se concentre le plus souvent sur certains problemes de detail, comme celui de l'exaucement de la priere du Christ, qui a suscite, on le sait, une conjecture celebre de Harnack. Quant a l'interpretation d'ensemble, on estime apparemment qu'elle ne presente pas de difficulte, et cette opinion fait qu'on se dispense de traiter clairement certaines questions, qui, meriteraient pourtant d'etre discutees.