Comment l'identité narrative de Jésus se décline-t-elle dans l'évangile selon Marc? La question est traitée en quatre étapes, à commencer par un examen de l'impact christologique des limites du récit marcien, son prologue et sa finale suspendue. Dans un deuxième temps, l'attention se porte sur le développement de l'intrigue de situation à partir des actions du protagoniste et des réactions qu'elles suscitent. En troisième lieu, l'intrigue de révélation et l'évolution des manières de désigner Jésus est analysée. Enfin, sous mode de synthèse, l'hypothèse est avancée d'une christologie ‘mystique’ de Marc, hypothèse préférée à la théorie devenue classique du secret messianique.

Scholars continue to divide over whether John the Baptist acclaims Jesus as ‘the Son of God’ or ‘the Chosen One of God’ at John 1.34. This article argues that transcriptional and intrinsic probabilities, supported by the testimony of a few early manuscripts, favour the latter reading. However, in adopting this reading, the claims that (a) the variation took place in the course of a battle against adoptionism and (b) ‘the Chosen One of God’ supplies corroboration that the original tradition underlying the Synoptic baptismal accounts was based solely on Isa 42.1, are found to be unnecessary and methodologically problematic respectively.

There is no consensus on the meaning of the syntagm ἔργα νόμου (in the discussion on the New Perspective on Paul). The main question is: Does the expression refer to halakhot or (so recently O. Hofius) to deeds? In the first case, according to Paul, justification does not depend on a system of regulations (in particular not on ‘boundary markers’), in the second case justification does not depend on the (good) works of individuals. Meanwhile a considerable group of scholars advocates the halakhot interpretation, and for instance Gal 3.10 supports it (τά γεγραμμένα, αὐτά). Diachronic arguments which, however, should not only consider the nomen regens (ἔργα) are to be added (see Apk 2.26; TestLev XIX.1; 4QMMT C27; yQid 63d). The Pauline references can be understood much better under this assumption, and it does not mean to undermine the ‘Lutheran’ emphasis on forgiving of sin and on Christ (see Gal 2.16–17). But now it is easier to take into account the apostle's positive statements concerning the law (see Rom 8.4) and concerning the judgement ‘according to the deeds of a person’ (see Rom 2.6).

Die These des Beitrags ist, dass die Wendung ‘ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν’ in 2 Thess 2.2 nicht als direkter Hinweis auf den 1 Thess zu verstehen sei, sondern dass sich hier vielmehr der pseudonyme Verfasser mit einer nicht mehr erhaltenen brieflichen Fehlinterpretation des 1 Thess auseinandersetzt und sich so indirekt um eine ‘richtige’ Deutung des 1 Thess bemüht. Im Unterschied zu 2 Thess 2.2 ist 2 Thess 2.15 als direkter Hinweis auf die—nach Meinung des Verfassers—‘richtige’ Paulus-Lehre, d.h. den 1 Thess oder den vorliegenden 2 Thess, zu verstehen. Mit dieser These schlägt der Artikel zugleich eine differenzierte Typologie der paulinischen und pseudo-paulinischen Diskurse vor.

This article proposes that the variant Βαλαάκ in the 72 text of Jude 11 be read in light of theological tendency in the Bodmer codex, especially as evidenced in the christological variants of 72. Initially, scholarly opinion dismissed the ‘Balaak’ reading as nothing more than an inexperienced copyist's careless mistake. Though recognizing the older view to be unsatisfactory, recent explanations are also inadequate. Given neutral or positive traditions about Balaam in Judaism, and in the context of the early Christian belief that the Spirit of Christ inspired the OT Prophets (including Balaam), the article makes a case for reevaluation of the variant.

The Revelation of John was written in Asia Minor, a region evangelized by the Apostle Paul. To what degree can traces of Paul's influence still be found at the end of the 1st century—not only with regard to the Seven Churches addressed and their conflicting tendencies, but also with regard to the author of the book of Revelation itself? How can we describe John's attitude towards the perceived legacy of the great missionary to the Gentiles? The answer provides additional insight into the diversity of early Christian life.

In 1993, Dieter Lührmann published a reconstruction of the more intelligible side of P.Oxy. 4009. He demonstrated that this side, which he called the recto, consists of passages parallel to Matt 10.16 par., Luke 10.3 and 2 Clem. 5.2–4. He also argued that the passage stems from the Gospel of Peter. However, Lührmann considered it impossible (‘ausgeschlossen’) to reconstruct the other side of the fragment. The aim of the present article is to demonstrate that a full reconstruction of this less intelligible side of P.Oxy. 4009, lines 1–13, is possible and that it enriches our knowledge of the Gospel of Peter with a new pericope which is an interesting parallel of Luke 7.36–50. The reconstruction also demonstrates that the side reconstructed by Lührmann is actually the verso, and that both sides together point towards the well-known anti-Jewish redactional tendencies of the author of the Gospel of Peter.

In einer exzellenten Studie hat B. R. Gaventa unlängst Bilder der Weiblichkeit in der paulinischen Theologie erörtert. Sie beginnt dabei mit einer Besprechung von 1 Thess 2.7b, entscheidet sich für die lectio difficilior νήπιοι statt ἤπιοι, und zwar sowohl aus textkritischen Gründen als auch aufgrund der Verwendung des Lexems νήπιος bei Paulus. So wäre ‘infant’/Kleinkind bzw. unmündig zu lesen und τροϕός als ‘nurse’/Kindermädchen bzw. ‘wet nurse’/Amme zu verstehen. So kommt man zu folgender Textfassung:

1. 2.7b άλλά ἐγενήθημεν νήπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν

2. 2.7 ὡς ἐάν τροϕὸς θάλπῃ τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα.