1 Timothy defines the ekklēsia as the οἶκος θεοῦ. This has led to the conclusion that the Pastoral Epistles regard the ekklēsia as an enlarged oikos, where the roles of the officials and the norms regulating the behaviour of its members reproduce the relationships of the patriarchal household. However, οἶκος θεοῦ is not a household properly speaking. Ekklēsia is a term with political connotations, and thus the community acquires a public dimension. In addition, oikos is used metaphorically, for a larger community. In this, the definition reflects the ancient custom of describing larger communities (the cosmos, the polis, or an association) through the metaphor of the oikos. The ekklēsia is therefore a public, quasi-cosmic space, whose laws and structures receive divine legitimation.

The publication of Josef Schmid's landmark work on the textual history of the Apocalypse seemingly established the Andreas Text Type as a fourth-century product. The primary evidence for Schmid's claim came from the fourth-century corrections of the Apocalypse in Codex Sinaiticus, corrections which bore a close resemblance to the Andreas text of the Apocalypse. Schmid's reconstruction, however, is flawed. The fourth-century corrections he identified are actually from the seventh century. The data supporting a fourth-century Andreas text type does not exist. Schmid's widely influential error appears to have been based on a misreading of Milne and Skeat's Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus.

This article responds to a recent proposal by Richard Last that 1 Cor 11.19 speaks of the necessity of holding regular ‘elections’ (αἱρέσεις) for the appointment of church officers who would assist in the administration of the Lord's Supper (11.17–34). In addition to exaggerating difficulties inherent in traditional explanations, Last's proposal introduces a number of insurmountable discourse problems, rendering his interpretation more problematic than those he intends to replace. A traditional reading should be retained, in support of which further arguments are here added.

In 1 Cor 1.12 Paul summarises a report he has received about divisions in the Corinthian congregation and attributes four so-called slogans to the Corinthians: ‘I am of Paul; I am of Apollos; I am of Cephas; I am of Christ’. Exegetes have puzzled especially over the final slogan, ‘I am of Christ’. This paper argues that this phrase was written as Paul's own claim against the divided Corinthians and belongs to no sectarian ‘Christ-group’. I attempt to demonstrate that this reading is grammatically possible, contextually consistent and therefore exegetically preferable.

The saying in the Gospels about the blood ‘from Abel to Zechariah’ has generated a number of theories regarding the identity of Zechariah and why Jesus specifically mentions these two victims. While a prominent interpretation today regards the names as pointing to the bookends of the Hebrew Bible, the Greek and Latin Fathers had their own peculiar ways of solving the exegetical puzzles connected to the saying. It seems that the invention of the printing press, and the stable sequence of books it created, exerted an influence on the development of the popular modern view.

This article argues that the double negative form of the ‘disclosure formula’ in 2 Cor 1.8 (οὐ … θέλομεν ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν) is not merely a stylistic variation on θέλομεν ὑμᾶς γινώσκειν but performs the additional rhetorical function of disavowing any attempt on Paul's part to hide the story of his sufferings from the church in Corinth. The transition from 1.8–11 to 1.12–14 (which many commentators struggle to explain) thus becomes a smooth and obvious one, suggesting a close interconnection between Paul's defence of his transparency and integrity in 1.12–2.13 and his apology for his sufferings in 2.14–7.4.

The inscribed thigh of the rider on the white horse in Rev 19.16 is an allusion to an MT – like Gen 49.10b text. The phrase ‘inscribed on his thigh’ was a legitimate translation of the words found in Gen 49.10b at the time of the composition of Revelation.

Although interpreters of Philippians have observed both the number and the progression of items in Phil 3.5–6, previous scholarship on the letter has failed to recognise that this ‘catalogue of boasting’ consists of precisely seven items. As a result, commentators have not attempted to explicate these two verses in light of the ostensible presence and influence of numerical symbolism. This paper offers a fresh reading of Phil 3.5–6 (and surrounding verses) – one that keeps Paul's sevenfold list of his pedigree and performance in Judaism clearly in view. The insights gleaned from the interpretation proffered in this article enable a fuller understanding of this programmatic autobiographical text.

The perfect tense-form verb ἀναβέβηκεν in John 3.13 is usually interpreted in light of traditional verb theory, as a ‘past action with present results’. This interpretation introduces an apparent problematic chronology in that the Son of Man ascends before descending; however, recent developments in Greek grammar, particularly verbal aspect theory, provide a viable solution to this grammatical ‘problem’ and indicate that the Son of Man's descent precedes his ascent.