Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1017/s0028688523000061
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
{"title":"NTS volume 69 issue 2 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s0028688523000061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688523000061","url":null,"abstract":"An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136244431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1017/s002868852300005x
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
{"title":"NTS volume 69 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s002868852300005x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s002868852300005x","url":null,"abstract":"An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"1123 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136244435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1017/S0028688522000376
R. Eklund
Abstract In Luke 6.11, the scribes and Pharisees are filled with ἄνοια after they witness Jesus’ healing on the Sabbath. Modern English translations, beginning with the RSV, translate the word ἄνοια as rage or fury, whereas older English translations render it as madness, and modern German translations follow Martin Luther by rendering the phrase with terms such as unsinnig (‘wurden ganz unsinnig’) or Unverstand (‘wurden mit Unverstand erfüllt’). This article argues that Plato's explanation of the word ἄνοια in Timaeus 86b provides the typical semantic range of the word; it includes ἀμαθία (the folly of ignorance) and μανία (the folly of madness, or the loss of one's rational faculties), but not anger.1 This twofold usage is reflected in Greek literature from the fifth/fourth century bce through the fifth century ce, including in 2 Tim 3.9, the only other text in which ἄνοια occurs in the New Testament. To say that the scribes and Pharisees are filled with rage in Luke 6.11, therefore, both exceeds the typical function of the word ἄνοια and risks further dehumanising two groups of people who are too often dehumanised by Christian tradition.
在路加福音6章11节中，文士和法利赛人在见证了耶稣在安息日的医治后，心中充满了οια。现代英语翻译，从RSV开始，把这个词翻译成愤怒或愤怒，而旧的英语翻译把它翻译成疯狂，现代德语翻译跟随马丁·路德，把这个短语翻译成unsinnig (' wurden ganz unsinnig ')或Unverstand (' wurden mit Unverstand erfllt ')。本文认为，柏拉图在《蒂迈奥篇》86b中对οια一词的解释提供了该词的典型语义范围;它包括了ν μαθ末梢α(无知的愚蠢)和μαν末梢α(疯狂的愚蠢，或理性能力的丧失)，但不包括愤怒这种双重用法反映在公元前5 / 4世纪至5世纪的希腊文学中，包括提摩太后书3.9，这是新约中唯一出现οια的文本。因此，说文士和法利赛人在路加福音6.11中充满了愤怒，这都超出了“οια”这个词的典型功能，而且有进一步使这两个群体失去人性的风险，而这两个群体经常被基督教传统所失去人性。
{"title":"Fury or Folly? ἄνοια in Luke 6.11","authors":"R. Eklund","doi":"10.1017/S0028688522000376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688522000376","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In Luke 6.11, the scribes and Pharisees are filled with ἄνοια after they witness Jesus’ healing on the Sabbath. Modern English translations, beginning with the RSV, translate the word ἄνοια as rage or fury, whereas older English translations render it as madness, and modern German translations follow Martin Luther by rendering the phrase with terms such as unsinnig (‘wurden ganz unsinnig’) or Unverstand (‘wurden mit Unverstand erfüllt’). This article argues that Plato's explanation of the word ἄνοια in Timaeus 86b provides the typical semantic range of the word; it includes ἀμαθία (the folly of ignorance) and μανία (the folly of madness, or the loss of one's rational faculties), but not anger.1 This twofold usage is reflected in Greek literature from the fifth/fourth century bce through the fifth century ce, including in 2 Tim 3.9, the only other text in which ἄνοια occurs in the New Testament. To say that the scribes and Pharisees are filled with rage in Luke 6.11, therefore, both exceeds the typical function of the word ἄνοια and risks further dehumanising two groups of people who are too often dehumanised by Christian tradition.","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"45 1","pages":"222 - 229"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81671428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1017/s002868852200042x
{"title":"Committee Members and Officers for 2022–3","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s002868852200042x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s002868852200042x","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"19 1","pages":"242 - 242"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86551965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1017/S0028688522000182
G. Kessel
Abstract Vat. iber. 4, a membrum disjectum of the manuscript Sin. geo. 49, contains on two of its folios the Syriac Gospel text as the lowest layer (scriptio ima) within a double palimpsest. Comparison with known Syriac versions of the extant text – Matt 11.30–12.26 – shows that the text represents the Old Syriac version, and is particularly akin to the Curetonianus (Syc). On palaeographic grounds, the original Gospel manuscript can be dated to the first half of the sixth century. The fragment is so far the only known vestige of the fourth manuscript witness to the Old Syriac version.
{"title":"A New (Double Palimpsest) Witness to the Old Syriac Gospels (Vat. iber. 4, ff. 1 & 5)","authors":"G. Kessel","doi":"10.1017/S0028688522000182","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688522000182","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Vat. iber. 4, a membrum disjectum of the manuscript Sin. geo. 49, contains on two of its folios the Syriac Gospel text as the lowest layer (scriptio ima) within a double palimpsest. Comparison with known Syriac versions of the extant text – Matt 11.30–12.26 – shows that the text represents the Old Syriac version, and is particularly akin to the Curetonianus (Syc). On palaeographic grounds, the original Gospel manuscript can be dated to the first half of the sixth century. The fragment is so far the only known vestige of the fourth manuscript witness to the Old Syriac version.","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"69 1","pages":"210 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85629355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1017/S0028688522000352
J. Marcus
Abstract While it is easy to interpret the first and second of the Matthean Antitheses (5.21–30) as intensifications of the Mosaic law, it is difficult to interpret the remaining Antitheses (5.31–48) in this manner. In the history of interpretation, two main strategies have been adopted for dealing with these later Antitheses, the ‘rejected interpretation’ hypothesis and the revocation hypothesis. The ‘rejected interpretation’ hypothesis, however, is only plausible for the last Antithesis (5.43–8), which appends ‘and hate your enemy’ to the Levitical exhortation to love one's neighbour; in all other instances, the ‘thesis’ statement is either a biblical citation or a close paraphrase of one or more biblical passages. Although the revocation hypothesis has often been deployed in an anti-Jewish way, there is nothing intrinsically anti-Jewish about it; indeed, both biblical authors, such as the Deuteronomist and Ezekiel, on the one hand, and some rabbis, on the other, explicitly revise prior biblical laws while at the same time claiming to be changing nothing. Matthew does something similar when he introduces the revisionist Antitheses with a programmatic statement about the unchangeableness of the Law (5.17–20). The Matthean Jesus, then, is not ‘seconding Sinai’ but correcting it.
{"title":"The Enigma of the Antitheses","authors":"J. Marcus","doi":"10.1017/S0028688522000352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688522000352","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While it is easy to interpret the first and second of the Matthean Antitheses (5.21–30) as intensifications of the Mosaic law, it is difficult to interpret the remaining Antitheses (5.31–48) in this manner. In the history of interpretation, two main strategies have been adopted for dealing with these later Antitheses, the ‘rejected interpretation’ hypothesis and the revocation hypothesis. The ‘rejected interpretation’ hypothesis, however, is only plausible for the last Antithesis (5.43–8), which appends ‘and hate your enemy’ to the Levitical exhortation to love one's neighbour; in all other instances, the ‘thesis’ statement is either a biblical citation or a close paraphrase of one or more biblical passages. Although the revocation hypothesis has often been deployed in an anti-Jewish way, there is nothing intrinsically anti-Jewish about it; indeed, both biblical authors, such as the Deuteronomist and Ezekiel, on the one hand, and some rabbis, on the other, explicitly revise prior biblical laws while at the same time claiming to be changing nothing. Matthew does something similar when he introduces the revisionist Antitheses with a programmatic statement about the unchangeableness of the Law (5.17–20). The Matthean Jesus, then, is not ‘seconding Sinai’ but correcting it.","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"39 5 1","pages":"121 - 137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78083585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-06DOI: 10.1017/S0028688522000200
T. Engberg-Pedersen
Abstract 2 Cor 10–13 may be seen to hang together closely, both internally and with the rest of the canonical letter, once one notices the very careful manner in which Paul distinguishes between and handles three groups: (i) the Corinthians as such, a group that includes his ‘own people’ and sometimes also (ii) his internal critics; and (iii) the rival missionaries. The four chapters are built over a set of four motifs: 2nd or 3rd person? absence or presence? meekness or boldness? building up or tearing down? In light of this, one finds the following structure: A (10.1–11) on the i- and ii-groups; B (10.12–11.21), C (11.22–12.10), and D (12.11–13) on the iii- and i-groups; and E (12.14-13.13) on the i- and ii-groups. The four chapters – and indeed, the letter as a whole – have an inner dynamic that reaches its writerly goal in the comparison of Paul to the iii-group (C). The final, rhetorical aim, however, consists in establishing the proper relationship between Paul himself and the i-group as he is about to reach Corinth once more in the flesh.
格林多后书10-13可以被看作是紧密联系在一起的，无论是内部的还是与其他的正典书信，一旦人们注意到保罗区分和处理三个群体的非常谨慎的方式:(i)哥林多信徒，一个包括他“自己的人”的群体，有时也(ii)他内部的批评者;(三)敌对的传教士。这四章是围绕着四个主题展开的:第二人称还是第三人称?缺席还是在场?温柔还是大胆?建还是拆?据此，可以发现如下结构:A(10.1-11)在i-和ii-基团上;B (10.12-11.21)， C (11.22-12.10)， D (12.11-13);和E(12.14-13.13)在i-和ii-基团上。这四章——实际上，这封信作为一个整体——有一个内在的动力，在保罗与第三组的比较中达到了它的写作目标(C)。最后，修辞的目的，然而，在于建立保罗自己和第组之间的适当关系，因为他即将再次以肉体到达哥林多。
{"title":"The Logic of Paul's Address in 2 Corinthians 10-13","authors":"T. Engberg-Pedersen","doi":"10.1017/S0028688522000200","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688522000200","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract 2 Cor 10–13 may be seen to hang together closely, both internally and with the rest of the canonical letter, once one notices the very careful manner in which Paul distinguishes between and handles three groups: (i) the Corinthians as such, a group that includes his ‘own people’ and sometimes also (ii) his internal critics; and (iii) the rival missionaries. The four chapters are built over a set of four motifs: 2nd or 3rd person? absence or presence? meekness or boldness? building up or tearing down? In light of this, one finds the following structure: A (10.1–11) on the i- and ii-groups; B (10.12–11.21), C (11.22–12.10), and D (12.11–13) on the iii- and i-groups; and E (12.14-13.13) on the i- and ii-groups. The four chapters – and indeed, the letter as a whole – have an inner dynamic that reaches its writerly goal in the comparison of Paul to the iii-group (C). The final, rhetorical aim, however, consists in establishing the proper relationship between Paul himself and the i-group as he is about to reach Corinth once more in the flesh.","PeriodicalId":19280,"journal":{"name":"New Testament Studies","volume":"24 1","pages":"1 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84685885","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：