This article asks how the New Comedy of Menander might have influenced Paul's theological rhetoric in 1 Cor 5–15. An intertextual reading of Paul's letter against the backdrop of Menander's Samia reveals a number of shared topics, ethical concerns and dramatic characteristics. Paul's citation of Menander's Thais in 1 Cor 15.33 is part of this larger strategy to frame the struggles in Corinth within the ambit of Greek household ‘situation comedy’. Like Menander, Paul hybridises tragic and comic motifs throughout his epistle, inflecting the comedy of the Christ narrative with tragic examples of human misapprehension in this plea for ecclesial reconciliation.

The majority of translations and commentaries render the phrase κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν in 2 Tim 4.3 as ‘having itching ears’ (or something to the same effect). Many commentaries and lexica claim, furthermore, that this figure of speech expresses curiosity. The present study demonstrates that the phrase found in 2 Tim 4.3 is an idiom that occurs quite frequently in first- and second-century ce literature. Contemporary usage of this expression suggests, first, that the translation at 2 Tim 4.3 should be ‘having their ears tickled’, rather than ‘having itching ears’, and, second, that the idiom refers primarily to the experience of pleasure rather than curiosity. This translation and interpretation of κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν fits the context of 2 Timothy better than other commonly proposed readings and is significant for how we understand the author's portrayal of his opponents and their appeal to the believers.

Codex Bezae lacks the Greek text of Acts 10.4–14, but the Latin text survives on fol. 455a. Damage to the manuscript has caused traces of ink from the now-lost Greek text to be transferred onto the Latin page of Acts 10.4–14. They preserve a mirror image of text from fol. 454b, the facing page at the time of the damage. By reversing high-resolution images of fol. 455a with photo-editing software, the offset ink can be deciphered. As a result, the surviving Greek text from Acts 10.4–9 in Codex Bezae is published here for the first time.

Much has been made in recent years about the role of the secretary in the construction of Paul's letters, most notably by Randolph Richards and Ian Elmer. This article focuses on the most famous secretary – Tertius. Through an analysis of what can be learned of Tertius’ identity and his relationship to Paul and to ancient authorial practices in households, it argues that Tertius was probably a slave in the household of one of the Corinthian Christ-followers, whose role was simply to inscribe the letter. His inability to use Paul's signature phrase ἐν κυρίῳ in a Pauline fashion highlights his lack of authorial input. Tertius’ self-initiated greeting in Rom 16.22 probably began life as a marginal comment that was moved early into the letter body.

This article interacts with Peter J. Gurry's recent estimate of the total textual variants in the Greek New Testament (NTS 62 (2016)) by (i) employing a different (and complementary) method using data from the Editio Critica Maior and (ii) producing an estimate that is narrowly confined to the ‘key’ manuscript witnesses for Acts and the Catholic Letters (a mix of majuscules and minuscules, both Byzantine and non-Byzantine). The results prove more useful for framing the development and distribution of textual variants in this group of key witnesses.

Though commentators often claim that Rev 18.13 entails a critique of the slave trade, a robust defence of this assertion has not been offered. In this article, I first analyse the use of the terms σώματα and ψυχαὶ ἀνθρώπων in the extant Greek literature and demonstrate that the peculiar conjunction of these terms in Rev 18.13 is best understood as a critique of the slave trade. I then demonstrate that such an interpretation accords with the literary context of Rev 18.13. This article thus offers an important contribution to the ongoing debate concerning the early Christian view of slavery.

This article examines the background of the concept of Sabbath rest (σαββατισμός) in Heb 4.1–11. Special attention is given to the relation between God's rest and God's activity, which seemingly are in tension with each other: on the one hand, the author's argument is based on the assumption that God entered his rest at the seventh day of creation and stopped working forever (4.10); on the other hand, there is a clear reference to God's works after creation (3.9–10). A comparison with Philo's explanations of the seventh day of creation, however, reveals that for a Jewish Middle Platonist this tension does not appear to be a problem because rest and activity in God are two sides of the same coin. It is argued that this background helps to explain Hebrews’ concept of Sabbath rest. A concluding outlook shows that the suggested Middle Platonic understanding of Hebrews 4 fits well the context of the epistle as a whole, as the same coexistence of rest and activity can also be found in Hebrews 7 in relation to Jesus’ intercession in the heavenly tabernacle.

In the Journal of Roman Studies of 2015, I argued that the evidence in Tacitus for a state-directed punishment of Christians in Rome in 64 ce was too weak to sustain the historical interpretation of it as a persecution. In a reply in this journal last year, Christopher Jones argued that knowledge of Christians under that name could well have reached Rome by the mid-60s, that the vulgus of the city could well have accused such persons, and that the Tacitean account is therefore generally credible. While admitting the justice of some of his criticisms, I attempt in this reply to clarify some of my arguments and to restate my original claim that a persecution of Christians by the emperor Nero in connection with the Great Fire of 64 seems improbable given the context of the relations between officials of the Roman state and Christians over the first century ce.

This article addresses a debate over the proper interpretation of the phrase ἔχοντες χάριν πρὸς ὅλον τὸν λαόν in Acts 2.47. Several authors have been persuaded by T. David Andersen's argument that this expression means that the Jerusalem community was ‘showing favour towards all the people’ rather than ‘having favour with all the people’, as it has usually been translated. Andersen's evidence is much more ambiguous than he suggests, however, and I present three more precise parallels to the phrase in Acts 2.47 that strongly support the standard translation.

The figures of Demas and Hermogenes in the Acts of Paul are puzzling for their ambiguous relation with figures by the same name in 2 Timothy (and, for Demas, in Philemon and Colossians). The purpose of the present article is to question what personal biographical details present in the Thecla narrative contribute to larger issues of literary dependence, focusing in particular on the notice that Hermogenes is a ‘coppersmith’. Although several scholars explain this passing reference in terms of a confused literary dependence on previous Pauline traditions, it is rarely approached as a meaningful narrative feature. This personal detail, however, should be read for its contribution to the Thecla narrative in light of the wider early Christian view of ‘smiths’, running from the New Testament texts into the third century and later. When these elements are taken into account, the smith-notice is highlighted as characterising Hermogenes (and, by extension, Demas) negatively.

These three short papers were delivered at the 72nd General Meeting of the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, held in Pretoria, South Africa, on 8–11 August 2017. The ‘Quaestiones disputatae’ session was chaired by the President of the Society, Professor Michael Wolter. The first two papers engage with Teresa Morgan's book, Roman Faith and Christian Faith, and Professor Morgan responds to them in the third.

Barnabas 10 offers an allegorical discussion of kashrut. The writer addresses dietary laws in two groups of three: prohibitions against the eating of pig, vulture and eel, followed by prohibitions against eating hare, hyena and weasel. In each case, the allegorical interpretation construes diet as comportment (e.g. one should not behave like a pig, vulture etc.). Concerning the hare, readers are admonished not to emulate its corruption of children – a behaviour linked to its annual acquisition of an anus. Parallel allegorical interpretations of the Jewish food laws can be found in the Letter of Aristeas and Philo, De specialibus legibus 4 and similar quasi-scientific observations about animals occur in texts ranging from the rabbis to Physiologus. However, the rabbit poses a particular problem since no known precedent exists for either its behaviour or its physiology. The present investigation thus focuses on the rabbit, attempting to reconstruct the literary and historical background for its unusual characterisation.

These three short papers were delivered at the 72nd General Meeting of the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, held in Pretoria, South Africa, on 8–11 August 2017. The ‘Quaestiones disputatae’ session was chaired by the President of the Society, Professor Michael Wolter. The first two papers engage with Teresa Morgan's book, Roman Faith and Christian Faith, and Professor Morgan responds to them in the third.

These three short papers were delivered at the 72nd General Meeting of the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, held in Pretoria, South Africa, on 8–11 August 2017. The ‘Quaestiones disputatae’ session was chaired by the President of the Society, Professor Michael Wolter. The first two papers engage with Teresa Morgan's book, Roman Faith and Christian Faith, and Professor Morgan responds to them in the third.