The authorship and date of the Book of Revelation have been the subject of much scholarly debate. Additional information from recently published Coptic Gnostic texts will contribute to the final resolution of the debate.

The Gnostic Apocrphon of John, used by Irenaeus as a source in his Adv. Haer., has been known since 1896.

The description of Wisdom in Sirach has exercised a profound influence on the interpretation of Matt 11.28–30. Many scholars, impressed with the evident parallels between Sir 51.23–7; 6.23–31 and the Matthean logion,1 have regarded the latter as dependent on the former.2 Others, taking a further step, have felt justified in interpreting the logion with reference to a wisdom christology. According to this view, Jesus, represented as Wisdom incarnate,3 offers rest to those burdened by the legal interpretations of the Pharisees4 through his yoke, which stands for his teaching, or, more precisely, for his interpretation of the law.5 This approach to the logion has had its detractors,6 and some scholars have questioned the suitability of positing any connection between Sirach and the logion.7 It is not the purpose of the present discussion to enter into this debate, but rather to draw attention to what might be termed a neglected feature in the discussion of Matt 11.28–30, namely the relation of the logion to certain OT prophetic themes.8

It is now over twenty years since Alejandro Dez Macho announced his discovery of a complete text of the Palestinian Targum contained in the Codex Neofiti I of the Vatican Library. Even before the first volume of the editio princeps was published, the importance of Neofiti 1(N) and its marginal and interlinear glosses (Ngl) was apparent not only to specialists in the Aramaic language, Old Testament studies, and Jewish Literature of the Second Temple, Mishnaic and Talmudic times, but also to New Testament scholars. A particular feature of N which was bound to attract attention sooner or later is its frequent use of the formula Memra (utterance, word) of ahweh in the first chapter of Genesis in place of the Ἐlohim of the Massoretic Text, a feature encountered otherwise only in the Fragmentary Targum (FT). As we shall see presently, the exact significance of the term Memra was once a matter for keen scholarly debate, some asserting that it represented an entity separate from God, an intermediary between God and the created order, others roundly denying that it was any such thing, and regarding it only as a reverent means of avoiding pronunciation of the Holy and Ineffable Name. For reasons shortly to be described it was the latter opinion which finally prevailed and which is now generally accepted as established fact; but in the days before the scholarly debate on Memra was concluded it had been quite common for New Testament scholars to argue that, as an hypostasis and intermediary between God and the world, Memra had formed either the single antecedent, or one of the antecedents, to the Logos of the prologue of St John's Gospel. The presence of Memra in the text of N to Gen. i, and its frequent appearance in the Ngl, has led to renewed scholarly interest in the relationship of Memra to St John's Logos, so much so that A. Dez Macho, McNamara, and Domingo Muoz are all prepared to consider Memra a key concept in any discussion of St John's prologue. With the results of previous scholarship in mind, and in the light of new evidence, it would appear that the time is now right for a critical evaluation of these recent claims.

The Church to which we are permitted to proclaim the Gospel is no longer the Palestinian Church of the time of Jesus, for whom the real goal of life was to pass safely through the judgement of God. Neither is the Church any longer that of the time of Luther, weighed down by its consciousness of sin and the medieval fear of judgement. Today the message of forgiveness of sins answers a question which, to a large extent, has disappeared from the consciousness of modern man. The modern world is, however, similar in many ways to the Hellenistic world into which the Christian message entered with the proclamation of Paul. The unity of heaven and earth, as it had been perceived in the classic period, is destroyed for the Hellenistic man. The world for him is controlled by powers and forces to which he has been handed over helpless. Ananke or Heimarmene (Fate or Destiny) determines everything and the action of the individual is incapable of altering their established course. The ever-repeated movement of the heavenly bodies, once conceived as the expression of divine harmony, awakens now the concept of a giant machine which mercilessly completes its revolution, deaf to the cries of men. Of course, the Stoic seeks to flee back into the old harmony between God and the world and for that reason declares the whole world to be his polis. But even he knows that everything in this polis is determined by the great powers, their mighty armies, and their modern weapons and no longer by his individual decision. Thus the desires and longings of the Hellenistic man are concentrated upon liberation from the demonic powers of this world and upon participation in the upper, godly world.

Les ‘addresses’ présidentielles de mes honorables prédépré cesseurs ont imposé à ce genre littéraire un certain esprit auquel je voudrais rester fidéle. Elles n'ont pas la pr'tention de présenter un programme ou d'imposer une méethode. Elles usent largement de la liberté de choix touchant les matiéres traitées. Elles évitent d'aborder des sujets trop techniquement spécialisés sans se diluer en considérations générales. Parfois elles n'hésitent pas ` déboucher sur des conclusions touchant de larges ensembles. Elles sont en tout cas des points d'aboutissement d'etudes antérieures autant que des ouvertures sur de nouveaux horizons. M'inspirant, selon mes moyens, de cette tradition déjà longue, je voudrais revenir vers cette église de Thessalonique, une des premiéres communautés européennes évangélisée par l' Apôtre, qui a occupé plusieurs années de ma pensée et ne l'a jamais quittée totalement. Tout en abordant une péricope bien délimitée, je compte marquer la distance qui sépare une exégése vieille de vingt ans des perspectives actuelles.

Die folgenden linguistischen Vorüberlegungen sind eklektischer Art. Zu einer konsistenten Textheorie, aus der sich so komplizierte Texte wie die synoptischen Evangelien oder auch nur Teiltexte daraus deduzieren ließen, sehe ich mich nicht in der Lage. Geleitet werden die folgenden elementarhaften Erwägungen von der Intention, die Methoden historisch-kritischer Exegese zu reflektieren. Dazu dient der texttheoretische (bzw. textlinguistische) und semiotische Ansatz. Die Ausgangsfragen sind: Was ist ein Text? und: Was tun wir, wenn wir einen Text exegesieren?

Preliminary Remarks. There are in the Synoptic Gospels many examples of Sayings joined in pairs or larger groups. Separately and in other connections such texts have certainly been discussed again and again. But the phenomenon as such has hardly been dealt with in a coherent study. Therefore I have chosen to gather a number of these instances and discuss them together, especially those cases where two parts of a double saying are built up in an analogous way. But the present study has – as the sub-title ‘Analysis versus Theories’ indicates – also a synoptic intention. This is not, as in the case of most synoptic studies, to corroborate some already existing synoptic theory or to present a new one. The analysis has to be carried through radically. But why, then, especially take up those texts where we meet with ‘Coordinated sayings and parables’? Because here we have an opportunity not only to make a comparison between the versions of the evangelists, but also to complete this with a comparison between the coordinated sayings.

Après son séjour à Sychar de Samarie (Jean iv. 5), Jésus ‘partit de là pour la Galilée’ (iv. 43), nous dit l'évangéliste, qui explique alors: ‘car (γάρ) Jésus avait déclaré lui-même qu'un prophéte ne jouit d'aucun égard dans sa propre patrie (πατρí;ς)’ (iv. 44). Puis il enchaî;ne: ‘A son arrivée en Galilée, les Galiléens lui firent bon accueil: ils avaient vu tout ce qu'il avait fait à Jérusalem lors de la fête; car eux aussi étaient allés à la fête’ (iv. 45).

In den vergangenen beiden Dezennien hat, wenn ich recht sehe, die Diskussion darüber, welcher literarischen Gattung das lukanische Geschichtswerk bzw. die Apostelgeschichte zuzurechnen seien, an Intensität zugenommen. Meist ging man davon aus, daß das lukanische Werk, besonders aber die Apostelgeschichte, in den Kontext der antiken Geschichtsschreibung gestellt werden müss-ten, etwa, indem man das Gesamtwerk als ‘popular “general history” written by an amateur Hellenistic historian with credentials in Greek rhetoric’ definierte oder die Apostelgeschichte als historische Monographie klassifizierte, ähnlich den Werken Sallusts und entsprechend dem von Cicero, Ep. ad fam. V 12.2–3 vorgetragenen Programm. Dieser Konsens – wenn er denn wirklich je bestanden haben sollte – wurde dann aber durchbrochen, zunächst von Charles H. Talbert, der das Doppelwerk in den Kontext der Biographie, insbesondere der Philosophenbiographie, stellen wollte, und neuerdings hat man wieder einmal gemeint, die Apostelgeschichte in die Nähe der apokryphen Akten rücken und in ihr so etwas wie einen historischen Roman entdecken zu sollen.

Die Talio ist keineswegs nur in der Heiligen Schrift der Juden und Christen belegt,2 sondern findet sich in vielen Kulturräumen der Antike. Auf das Abendland bezogen sind hier vor allem Griechen-land3 und das Römische Reich zu nennen, in denen die Talio breit bezeugt ist, aber auch die Ägypter, Altbabylonier, Perser und Germanen haben sie gekannt.4 Im Iran kann sich noch heute ein Mörder durch die Zahlung des sog. Blutgeldes an die Angehörigen des Opfers (arab. diyah, pers. dieh) Strafmilderung oder in be-stimmten Fällen sogar Straffreiheit ‘erkaufen’, obwohl im Islam normalerweise Mord grundsätzlich durch den Tod des Mörders gesühnt wird.5 An dieser Regelung ist der Charakter der Talio als Milderung (gegenüber der Ausübung der unbeschränkten Rache) noch erkennbar.6

Nach der traditionellen Chronologie hat Paulus bis zum sog. Apostelkonzil in Syrien und Cilicien gewirkt, seine großen Missions-reisen also erst mindestens ‘vierzehn Jahre’ nach der Bekehrung angetreten.

Our redemption by the death of Christ on the cross is summed up in the credal statement of 1 Corinthians 15.3, ‘that Christ died for our sins (ύπέρ τν άμαρτιν ήμν)’, or very simply ‘for us (ύπέρ ήμ⋯ν)' (Rom 5.8). The meaning of this ύπέρ could be either vicarious: he died in our place; or atoning: he died on our behalf. But, whereas the ‘for our sins’ formula can be understood only in the atoning sense, the ‘for us’ one can be taken in both the vicarious and the atoning sense. Moreover, the ‘for us’ formula is logically — though not necessarily chronologically — prior to the ‘for our sins’ one. The latter might well have had its origin on Palestinian soil under the influence of Isaiah 53. 4–5,10.