Since the summer of 1994 I have been studying the Gospel fragments known as P4, P64 and P67, in order to determine whether they are all the work of the same scribe, and if so the nature of the manuscript of which they formed part. The fragments have been published as follows:

P4: the definitive edition is by Jean Merell in RB 47 (1938) 5–22 and Planches I–VII.

P64: first edited by C. H. Roberts in HTR 46 (1953) 233–7 and plate; re-edited, with revised edition of P67, in R. Roca-Puig, Un papiro griego del Evangelio de San Mateo, 2a edic, con una Note de Colin Roberts (Barcelona, 1962) with plate.

The view that the Holy Spirit as the source of prophecy was believed by Jews during the tannaitic period to have withdrawn from Israel, to return only in the eschatological future, is built upon a pastiche of texts: Ps 74.9; 1 Macc 4.46, 9.27 and 14.41; Josephus's Ap. 1.37—41; 2 Apoc. Bar. 85.3; Pr Azar 15; and t. Soṭa 13.2—4. On the basis of such texts, E. Sjöberg referred to ‘a widespread theological conviction’ about the withdrawal of the Holy Spirit and J. Vos to ‘die verbreitete Tradition’. C. K. Barrett quoted G. F. Moore approvingly: ‘The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of prophecy … The Holy Spirit is so specifically prophetic inspiration that when Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the last prophets, died, the Holy Spirit departed from Israel.’ W. D. Davies suggested cautiously, after a thorough analysis of the data, ‘… we may now assume that Paul was reared within a Judaism which, to use very moderate language, tended to relegate the activity of the Holy Spirit to the past’. G. W. H. Lampe generalized, ‘In the main, the Spirit continues to be thought of as being, pre-eminently, the Spirit of prophecy, manifested in the distant past in such great figures as Elijah (Ecclus. 48.12) or Isaiah (vs. 24), but which was now no longer present in Israel.’ J. Jeremias subtitled section nine of his New Testament Theology ‘The Return of the Quenched Spirit’, and

In 1987, George Howard published the text of a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew contained in a fourteenth-century Jewish polemical treatise entitled Evan Bohan authored by Shem-Tob ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut. In his analysis of Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew, Howard demonstrates convincingly that the Shem-Tob text should not be considered a fourteenth-century back-translation from Greek or Latin traditions, but concludes that within the Shem-Tob text of Matthew is contained an ancient Hebrew substratum which dates back to early times, and indeed, represents an original composition in Hebrew of Matthew's Gospel. In a subsequent study, Howard compared the text of Shem-Tob against that of Codex Sinaiticus, finding five readings that Shem-Tob shares with only Sinaiticus and four more that are shared with Sinaiticus and a few other minor witnesses, strongly suggesting that Shem-Tob does indeed contain ancient readings. Using a similar methodology, this article will explore the textual relationship between Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew and the third-century papyrus 45.

The much greater similarity of Colossians and Ephesians to each other than of either to any other Pauline letter has been recognized since the beginning of the historical critical movement, and been seen to require explanation. In this paper we shall be concerned to examine only the purely literary aspect of the problem of their relationship leaving aside their theological similarities and dissimilarities; nor shall we attempt to draw theological conclusions from our discussion of individual phrases or verses. To do this would require setting them in their context in Ephesians and vastly increase the length of the paper.

The natural starting point for any interpretation of the Epistle of James is its praescriptio, where the author defines for his readers their own communal identity by addressing them as ‘the twelve tribes in the diaspora’. Whatever intentions may have lurked behind the attributive expression , the peculiar designation of the authorial audience as ‘the twelve tribes’ casts the readership with surprising clarity in the role of the true Israel. Although the author does not make further comment upon the relationship of his intended readers to the dominant Judaism of his day, it is surely correct to assume that an organizational separation had occurred. The community which James elsewhere refers to as the ⋯κκλησ⋯α (5.14) and which boasts its own teachers (3.1) and elders (5.14) had most certainly set itself apart in some degree from the entity whose title it is said to possess.

The Revelation of John presents to its readers a scenario that describes the oppression and persecution of the early Christian communities of western Asia Minor by external pagan forces (specifically, the Roman government). Later Christian tradition tied the Apocalypse to the later years of the reign of Domitian and consequently dubbed that emperor a second Nero. Until relatively recently, this scenario has been affirmed by both the church and the academy. However, mid-twentieth century scholarship successfully challenged the validity of this viewpoint, based upon a review of the historical evidence. Since that time, scholars have scrambled to reconcile the historical world lying behind the Apocalypse with the narrative world presented by the text. Such figures as James A. T. Robinson, Adela Yarbro Collins, and Leonard Thompson have considerably advanced the discussion in our time. However, these recent attempts to detail the relationship between Christianity and pagan society have so dominated the attention of scholars that a serious discussion of the tensions within the Asia Minor Christian communities has been largely neglected. The present study is offered as a partial corrective to this trend.

‘Und sein Erbarmen (ist) von Geschlecht zu Geschlecht mit denen, die ihn fürchten ()’, heißt es im vierten Vers des Magnificat in Lk 1.50. Wer vom zweiten Buch des Lukas, der Apostelgeschichte, herkommt, fühlt sich unwillkürlich an den heidnischen Hauptmann Kornelius erinnert, der ‘Gott fürchtete mit seinem ganzen Haus’ (Apg 10.2; vgl. 10.22), ebenso an die Worte des Petrus in Apg 10.34f., die ihm und alien Gleichgesinnten gelten: ‘In Wahrheit begreife ich, daß es bei Gott keine Bevorzugung der Person gibt, sondern in jedem Volk ist der, der ihn fürchtet und Gerechtigkeit bewirkt, ihm willkommen.’ Sollte Lukas diese Gottesfürchtigen im Magnificat schon im Blick haben? Diese Vermutung, die in der Sekundärliteratur kaum je Berück-sichtigung findet, verdient es, näher überprüft zu werden.

On ne trouvera pas dans les pages qui vont suivre une analyse détaillée du récit de Luc, ni un essai de reconstitution des étapes supposées de sa rédaction. Il nous suffira, dans cet ordre d'idées, de noter que le message adressé aux bergers, comme, du reste, les apparitions angéliques elles-mêmes, relèvent incontestablement d'un procédé littéraire hérité de l'Ancien Testament. Il s'agit, en somme, d'une mise en scène dramatique destinée à sou-ligner l'origine divine d'une intuition, d'une perception des choses qui, dans le cas présent, va âtre au coeur du récit et lui donnera tout son sens. Il n'y a pas lieu de la prendre à la lettre, ni, par conséquent, de se demander si et comment les bergers ont pu entrevoir quelque chose de la signification attribuée par l'ange à la mangeoire et aux langes.

The occurrence of the phrase in 4QMMT had already been exciting comment for some years prior to the official publication of the scroll fragments. In one of the first reflections on the official publication, Martin Abegg has suggested that Paul's use of the same phrase, ἔργα ν⋯μον, in Galatians and Romans (Gal 2.16; 3.2, 5,10; Rom 3.20, 28) indicates that Paul was ‘rebutting the theology of documents such as MMT … that Paul was reacting to the kind of theology espoused by MMT, perhaps even by some Christian converts who were committed to the kind of thinking reflected in MMT’. As we shall see below, Abegg has given some further reasons for seeing a parallel or even connection between the thought of 4QMMT and Paul's argumentation in Galatians in particular, but even he does not seem to have appreciated all the points of possible connection. At this early stage in assessing the significance of 4QMMT for New Testament study (‘nothing short of revolutionary’, concludes Abegg), it may be of value simply to summarize what these points of possible connection amount to.

There are two well-attested readings of Rev 22.14, the seventh and final blessing in the book. The reading accepted in the UBS 4th edition is , ‘Blessed are those who wash their robes’ (RSV). Most twentieth-century NT editions, including Nestle-Aland, and most commentators agree with the UBS. But, in my view, the original text is the other well-attested reading, , ‘Blessed are those who do his commandments’ (footnote in RSV). The manuscript attestation and versional evidence is not decisive for either reading, but patristic references, literary analysis, and consistency with the worldview in Revelation all favour the reading .

In my The Death of the Messiah, preparatory to examining the Gospel accounts of the trial/interrogation of Jesus by the chief priest(s) and San-hedrin, I surveyed the extra-Gospel evidence for authoritative Jewish involvement in the death of Jesus, derived from Jewish, Christian, and pagan sources. From the Jewish evidence I discussed two items: the witness of Josephus (Ant. 18.3.3; #63–t) and a baraita from TalBab Sanhedrin 43a which I quoted from the London Soncino translation (Nezikin volume 3.281):

On the eve of Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.’ But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of Passover.