¹ IDB 1. 428 s.v. “Biblical Theology, Contemporary”; cf. idem, Meanings: The Bible as Document and as Guide (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 37.Google Scholar

² Idem, Paul Among Jews and Gentiles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 36.Google Scholar

³ Idem, The Bible and the Role of Women: A Case Study in Hermeneutics (trans. Sander, Emilie T.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966) 17.Google Scholar These topics (nn. 1–3) are treated further below.

⁴ Idem, “Judaism and Christianity II: A Plea for a New Relationship,” Meanings, 222.

⁵ Neusner, Jacob, Ancient Judaism: Debates and Disputes (BJS 64; Chico: Scholars Press, 1984) 235–36.Google Scholar See also idem, Formative Judaism V: Religious, Historical and Literary Studies (BJS 91; Chico: Scholars Press, 1985) 51–77Google Scholar; Klein, Charlotte, Anti-Judaism in Christian Theology (trans. Quinn, Edward; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 67–91Google Scholar; Stendahl, “Judaism and Christianity I: Then and Now,” Meanings, 210. Nickelsburg, George points out the influence of Lutheran theology when he reviews Klein in RSR 4 (1978) 161–68.Google Scholar

⁶ Stendahl, “Judaism and Christianity II,” Meanings, 222.

⁷ Kraabel, A. T., “The Roman Diaspora: Six Questionable Assumptions,” JJS 33 (1982) 445–64 (Yadin Festschrift).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Maddox, Robert, The Purpose of Luke-Acts (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1982) 16.Google ScholarKraabel, A. T., “The Disappearance of the ‘God-fearers,’” Numen 28 (1981) 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹ Stern, Menahem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1976–1984).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Tcherikover, Victor A. and Fuks, Alexander, eds., Corpus Papyrorum Judakarum (3 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957–1964).Google Scholar

¹¹ I had developed an interest in Philo as an undergraduate at Luther College. At Harvard I studied archaeology with Nahman Avigad and G. M. A. Hanfmann, then worked as a research assistant for E. R. Goodenough until his death, then became involved in the Sardis excavations—all at Stendahl's recommendation and with his support.

¹² See Kraabel, “Disappearance,” 113–26 for specifics. The conclusion of that article bears repeating: “At least for the Roman Diaspora, the evidence presently available is far from convincing proof for the existence of such a class of Gentiles as traditionally defined by the assumptions of the secondary literature” (121). See the comments of Hemer, C. J. in Horsley, G. H. R., New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri published in 1978 (North Ryde, NSW: Ancient History Documentary Research Centre, Macquarie University, 1983) no. 17Google Scholar; but also Finn, Thomas H., “The God-fearers Reconsidered,” CBQ 47 (1985) 75–84.Google Scholar

¹³ The two terms are the bane of all who would insist on a single meaning. Academic terminology draws on the first participle: God-fearer, Gottesfürchtiger, craignant Dieu. The Latin term in literature and inscriptions is metuens, “fearing.” But the corresponding Greek adjective is supposedly θεοσεβής, literally “God-worshiping.” This last is a most catholic epithet. King Croesus of Sardis is thus described by Herodotos (1.86.2). Bishop Melito of Sardis uses θεοσεβής of Christians (see Eusebius Hist. eccl. 4.26.5). And the Sardis synagogue inscriptions use it six times of Jews who made donations to the building.

¹⁴ The distinction is most likely a literary device: “fearing God” is biblical language, while “worshiping God” is more reflective of pagan piety. Simon notes “dass der Übergang vom einen zum anderen beinahe dem Augenblick entspricht, an dem das apostolische Wirken des Paulus sich deutlich vom den Juden ab- u. den Heiden zuwendet,” RAC 11. 1063 s.v. “Gottesfürchtiger.” Most recently on literary devices in Luke see Tyson, Joseph B., “The Jewish Public in Luke-Acts,” NTS 30 (1984) 574–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Note how Bertram, G. unconsciously begins to refer to “fear of God” in his article, “;προσή- TDNT 3 (1965) 123–28Google Scholar, literally “worship of God.” Note, too, the gratuitous attack on diaspora Judaism and on the later church in the last paragraph of the article—all out of the “Reformation tradition”? Similar confusion with reference to epigraphic evidence is found in the article on “proselyte” (sic) by Kuhn, K. G., “προσή- λυτος” TDNT 6 (1968) 732–34.Google Scholar

¹⁶ EncJud 10. 55 s.v. “Jewish Identity.”

¹⁷ Stendahl, “Judaism and Christianity II,” Meanings, 230 n. 12. See also Stendahl's response to Ernst Käsemann in Paul, 129–33.

¹⁸ See Klein, Anti-Judaism, 21–38; Kraabel, “Roman Diaspora,” 454–56.

¹⁹ See Kraabel, A. T., “Impact of the Discovery of the Sardis Synagogue,” in George M. A. Hanfmann, Sardis from Prehistoric to Roman Times: Results of the Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, 1958–1975 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983) 178–90.Google Scholar

²⁰ Cf. John 1:38: Ῥαββί, ὅ λέγεται μεθερμηνευόμενον διδάσκαλε.

²¹ On the Sardis inscriptions see Kraabel, “Impact,” 184.

²² Frend, W. H. C., Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church (Oxford: Blackwell, 1965) 130 with n. 18.Google Scholar

²³ Idem, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 39.Google Scholar See also Kraabel, “Roman Diaspora,” 455 on a second-century inscription from Smyrna, CII 742 = Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes 1431, on which see Frend, Martyrdom, 148 n. 47.

²⁷ The crucial inscription is CII 766 = Monumenta Asiae minoris antiqua 6 no. 264 = Lifshitz, B., Donateurs et fondateurs dans les synagogues juives (Cahiers de RB 7; Paris: Gabalda, 1967) no. 33.Google Scholar See also Kraabel, “Roman Diaspora,’ 456. On the importance of philanthropy at this time, see Danker, Frederick W., Benefactor: Epigraphic Study of a Graeco-Roman and New Testament Semantic Field (St. Louis: Clayton, 1982).Google Scholar I have suggested already that the explanation might be similar for the very important Aphrodisias inscription soon to be published by Joyce Reynolds. It has been widely discussed even before publication, see Kraabel, “Disappearance,” 121 n. 26; Horsley, New Documents, no. 96; Meeks, Wayne, The First Urban Christians (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1983) 39.Google Scholar The inscription became widely known to scholars in religious studies in North America as a result of discussions which occurred in August 1984 at a conference at Brown University, sponsored in part by the NEH and the Lilly Endowment; the papers of the conference were published in Jacob Neusner and E. Frerichs, eds., “To See Ourselves as Others See Us”: Christians, Jews, “Others” in Late Antiquity. See esp. the articles by John J. Collins (182), A. T. Kraabel (230–32), and Tessa Rajak (255–57); and the article by R. S. MacLennan and Kraabel forthcoming in Biblical Archaeology Review.

²⁵ Esler, P. F., “Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology” (D. Phil, diss., Oxford University, 1984) 312.Google Scholar A revision of the manuscript will be published in 1986 by Cambridge University Press as an SNTSMS monograph.

²⁶ ibid., 143–47.

²⁷ See n. 15.

²⁸ For Hengel the God-fearers illustrate how “the Jewish religion … had to stoop to constant and ultimately untenable compromises” in the NT period: Judaism and Hellenism (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 1. 313.Google Scholar See also Kraabel, “Disappearance,” 114.

²⁹ ibid., 118, with references; Maddox, Purpose, chap. 3. Note the obiter dictum of Sandmel, Samuel in RSR 4 (1978) 159Google Scholar: “If Acts had never been written, or if Acts had been lost and not made its way into the New Testament and we had the Epistles alone, I doubt that any scholars would have supposed that there was some close relationship between Paul and Palestinian Judaism.” Significantly this statement appears in Sandmel's review of Sanders, E. P., Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977).Google Scholar

³⁰ Dibelius, Martin, Studies in the Acts of the Apostles (London: SCM, 1956) 154.Google ScholarBruce, F. F. attempts to turn this argument on its head in “Is the Paul of Acts the Real Paul?” BJRL 58 (1975–1976) 293 n. 2Google Scholar; cf. Kraabel, “Disappearance,” 125 n. 14. See also Maddox, Purpose, chap. 2.

³¹ All quotations in this paragraph are from Stendahl, Paul, 28–29.

³² For the Lukan theology involved, see Kraabel, “Disappearance.” On the possibility that early Christian anti-Jewish polemic might have had a positive intent, see most recently Stanton, G. N., “Aspects of Early Christian-Jewish Polemic and Apologetic,” NTS 31 (1985) 377–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar