BIBLISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT最新文献

By expanding the source base to include the so-called curse tablets, this study attempts to illuminate some aspects from a difficult Pauline paragraph. In Gal 3:10–14, Paul makes a very close connection between law and curse using Old Testament quotations. Some explanations on the employment of curses in legal contexts are used here to clarify on the background of popular magical practice certain features of the Pauline understanding of the law as well as the role of Christ as a counter-curse. An important prerequisite for this methodological approach is the common cultural repertory shared by the author and his readers.

Isaiah 56:9–59:21 is a carefully constructed unit with a coherent rhetorical agenda. By reinvigorating traditional prophetic literary materials, it aims to reform some traditional practices, revitalize social structures, and point toward a conception of שלום as the product of Yhwh’s action. The unit serves the larger construction of Isaiah 56–66 as a whole. It may be read as an attempt to reimagine the world without Persian rule while not identifying that rule as a sort of given against which it must define itself. That complex approach to persuasion and audience agency shows a level of creativity not always associated with this text.

Among the few inscriptions published in recent times that can be attributed to Thyatira, one of the seven cities of Revelation (cf. Rev 1:11; 2:18–29), a particularly noteworthy example is a lex sacra, or purity law. It regulates access to the sanctuary of an unspecified deity (presumably the μήτερ τῶν θεῶν). After presenting the material findings along with the Greek text and the German translation, the inscription is analyzed in terms of its linguistic form and genre. This is followed by a discussion of the individual cases of defilement (death, eating and touching garlic, murder and manslaughter, sexuality). Cross-references to biblical and intertestamental literature are included. The aim is to enhance the religious-historical profile of Thyatira, an Asia Minor city, which has received comparatively little attention in New Testament research.

In view of the scarcity of sources on the class of the Temple servants (Netinîm), it is advisable to look at Mesopotamian and Greek sources, which offer analogies by much richer information. For the question of conceivable analogies to the scattered information in Ezr/Neh, it must also be considered whether the Jerusalem Temple owned land and who carried out the necessary work.

This paper offers a new understanding of the word הקטן regarding David in 1 Samuel 16. Instead of focusing on David’s young age, the paper suggests focusing on his height, an understanding that is supported by various details in Samuel as well as in biblical and post-biblical literature.

The complex textual situation of the book remains a major topic in Jeremiah studies. The present article provides a case study on this topic, examining all divergences between the Masoretic text and the Old Greek translation of Jer 33,1–13. It supports the view that the Old Greek represents a variant Hebrew text form of the book, which is generally more ancient than the version of the Masoretic text. At the same time, the examination reveals secondary textual developments in the Hebrew text underlying the Old Greek, In addition, inner-translational factors played a role in causing divergences between the Hebrew and the Greek.

The statement in Gen 9,20 has often been taken to signify that Noah was either the first viticulturalist or agriculturalist. These interpretations are associated with the syntactic analysis of the noun phrase “a man of the soil (אישׁ האדמה)” as well as a certain understanding of the meaning of the verb חלל (hif.). This article argues that the noun phrase can better be understood as an adverbial accusative or an appositional noun phrase while the verb in question here signifies the beginning of an incomplete or durable action. In sum, the verse does not indicate that Noah was the first agriculturalist or viticulturalist, but simply states that he began the work on the soil and moved on to planting a vineyard.

As a narrator, Mark is a powerful authority. With his Gospel, he offers crisis management to his community in the existential crisis of the 70s and employs a narrative- historiographical approach. The offering of this crisis management is accompanied by the formation of authority and strong asymmetrical dependencies. The essay at hand traces these extremely complex processes and concretises the Markan “exercise of power” in two examples, namely the picture of Jesus’ relatives and the fleeing young man in 14:51–52. My impression is as follows: the narrator depicts various uncompleted positions towards Jesus without rashly marking “red lines”. He deliberately uses his authority of interpretation to grant “broken existences in the discipleship” a firm place within his community. Thus, he seeks to constructively respond to the acute crisis and consolidate this community.

John 21 is widely regarded as a secondary addition to the Gospel of John. The most important indication for this is the conclusion John 20:30–31, which may appear obsolete in view of the final conclusion John 21:24–25. Both conclusions, however, provide interesting insights into the hermeneutical positions of their respective authors in the development of Christian collective memories with regard to the deliberate selection of relevant Jesus traditions, the transition from oral tradition to literary writing, and the personalization of memory, attached to the Beloved Disciple. Based on understanding them as self-reflective documents of collective memory, the comparison of these two conclusions makes it possible to delineate two different stages in the textualization and literarization of Jesus tradition and to define their respective places on the map of early Christian collective memories.

The article reflects on the biblical concept of glory (כבד / δόξα) and details aspects of its theological content by reading relevant passages in their literary contexts. The second part of the article ponders methodological questions of an exegesis that aims at theological insights.