and James
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
2. A TRADITION LIKE DID. 3:1-6 UNDERLYING THE MATTHEAN ANTITHESES
AND JAMES'sS LETTER
I will now demonstrate that the ethical code in Did. 3:1-6 or a comparable tradition underlies the high standards of the halakic way of life in both the Matthean section and James.
2.1. THE ANTITHESES SECTION IN MATTHEW
How are the teknon segment in Did. 3:1-6 and the Antitheses section in the Sermon on the Mount connected? Does the closely matching order and content of the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on the Plain (Luke 6:20-49) not preferably lead to the assumption that "Q" was the source of Matthew's sermon?
Indeed, Luke's version is probably very close to the original version in Q.19
Nevertheless, if one takes the traditions behind Luke 6:20-49 to reflect Jesus's sayings, it is not hard to observe that Matthew must have considerably changed and expanded the extent and profile of the traditional Q sermon.?° As far as Matt
5:17-48 is concerned, he almost certainly had another source at his disposal with which he intertwined the materials from Q, especially the passage reflected in Luke 6:27-36.
2.1.1. The Antitheses Section (Matt 5:17-48) and the Law In order to prove the relevance of Did. 3:1-6 to the Antitheses section, the initial concern must be to establish definitive connections.?! Let us first consider
19. See Graham N. Stanton, A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew (Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1992), 288.
20. "The amount of material in Matt 5-7 added to the Q speech is so impressive that the question arises whether Matthew's redaction is understandable without previous catechetic collections besides the Q sermon"; see Kari Syreeni, "The Sermon on the Mount and the Two
Ways Teaching of the Didache," in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same
Jewish-Christian Milieu? (ed. H. van de Sandt; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005), 100.
21. A number of scholars have found important agreements between Matt 5:21-48 and Did. 3:1-6; see Franz X. Funk, Doctrina duodecim Apostolorum. Canones Apostolorum ecclesiastici ac reliquae doctrinae de duabus viis expositiones veteres (Tubingen: Laupp, 1887), 12;
Leonhard Goppelt, Christentum und Judentum im ersten und zweiten Jahrhundert (BFCT 2/55;
Giitersloh: Bertelsmann, 1954), 187; Hanns Lilje, Die Lehre der zwolf Apostel. Eine Kirchenordnung des ersten christlichen Jahrhunderts (Die urchristliche Botschaft 28; Hamburg: Furche,
1956), 51-52; Stanislas Giet, L'Enigme de la Didaché (PFLUS 149; Paris: Ophrys, 1970), 15860; Clayton N. Jefford, The Sayings of Jesus in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (VCSup 11;
Leiden: Brill, 1989), 65-67; Betz, Sermon on the Mount, 219; Giinther Bornkamm, "Der Aufbau der Bergpredigt," NTS 24 (1978): 432; David Flusser, "A Rabbinic Parallel to the Sermon on the Mount," in Judaism and the Origins of Christianity: Collected Articles (ed. D. Flusser; Jerusalem:
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Matthew's Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:3-7:27). The central part of the Sermon opens and closes with references to "the Law and the Prophets" (5:17 and 7:12).
This section is in turn bifurcated. While the second division (6:1-7:12) of the section touches only indirectly upon issues of the law, the first division in 5:17-48 is thoroughly linked to the law and its commandments. It begins with a unit containing a programmatic statement on the validity of the Torah in Matt 5:17-20.
In the next segment (5:21-48) the Antitheses occur, each of which is made up of two parts including an initial quotation from the law and, so it seems at first glance, Jesus's refutation of it.
The six scenarios of the exposition in 5:21-48 report what Jesus, according to Matthew, taught about offences like murder, adultery, divorce, perjury, retaliation, and hatred of one's enemy. They include a thesis, an antithesis, and, with the exception of the third scenario, an illustration of the significance of the saying
(see 5:23-26 elaborating on 5:21-22; 5:29-30 on 5:27-28; 5:34b-37 on 5:33-34a; 5:39b-42 on 5:38-39a and 5:45-48 on 5:43-44). The elaborations seem to be extraneous materials that once circulated as independent sayings. Because these additions are likely to have been attached to the simple antitheses in a later stage, they will not be discussed here.?2
The six antitheses in 5:21-48 contain a premise or thesis, mostly citing from or referring to commandments in the Torah, and an antithetical response to these commandments, introduced by the formula, "But I say to you." Unfortunately, the term "antitheses" has become the traditional designation of this phraseology implying the conviction that Jesus contradicted the Law of Moses.?3 However, the remainder of the Gospel does not suggest that Jesus's demands be confused with abrogating or watering down Jewish law. On the contrary, in 5:17-19 Matthew offers the assurance that the Antitheses are not intended to abolish but to Magnes, 1988), 497-99, 504-5; idem, "Die Tora in der Bergpredigt," in Juden und Christen lesen dieselbe Bibel (ed. H. Kremers; Duisburg: Braun, 1973), 106-9 and nn. 11-12. For a comprehensive corroboration of the following, see van de Sandt and Flusser, The Didache: Its Jewish
Sources, 193-237.
22. See also John P. Meier, Law and History in Matthew's Gospel: A Redactional Study of Mt. 5:17-48 (AnBib 71; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1976), 126.
23. The second member of the antithesis, "but I say to you," is introduced by 5é instead of GANG. The conjunction 5é must not be taken as a strong adversative and translated as if AAG were used. The translation "but" makes the contrast too strong and gives the impression that Jesus deliberately sets himself over against the law; see David Flusser, "Den Alten ist gesagt':
Zur Interpretation der sog. Antithesen der Bergpredigt," Jud 48 (1992): 38; Robert H. Gundry,
Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982),
83; John Levison, "A Better Righteousness: The Character and Purpose of Matthew 5:21-48,"
Studia Biblica et Theologica 12 (1982): 176; William D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew (3 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1988), 1:507 who would translate the antitheses this way: "You have heard that it was said (to the ancients) . . . but I (in addition) say to you."
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
promote this law. He certainly ruled out the possibility of offering opposition to the law.
There is widespread agreement that the content of all the Antitheses is traditional. This does not extend to formal composition, however. Most commonly, the specific formulations of the first, second, and fourth Antitheses (Matt 5:2122, 27-28, 33-34a) are considered pre-Matthean while the antithetical pattern in the remainder of the series is assumed to be a secondary arrangement based on the earlier three.*4 Thus, those antitheses that evidence a radicalization of the commandments rather than a direct opposite character are generally considered to have been received by Matthew in antithetical form. In these paragraphs the counterstatement radicalizes, intensifies, and transcends the premise rather than revoking or changing it. Not only must you not kill, you must not even get that angry (5:21-22). Not only must you not commit adultery, you must not even look desirously at another man's wife (5:27-28). Not only must you keep oaths sworn in God's name, you must not swear oaths at all (5:33-34a).25 In these antitheses,
24. Most scholars subscribe to Bultmann's analysis that the first, second and fourth antitheses are traditional (pre-Matthean) while the the other three (with Lucan parallels) are assigned to Matthew's redaction; cf. Rudolph Bultmann, Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition (8th ed.; FRLANT 29; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970), 143-44; Ulrich Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthdus: Mt 1-7 (EKKNT 1/1; Ziirich: Benziger-Verlag, 1985), 246 (though he is inclined to believe that the fourth antithesis is redactional too); Maarten J. J. Menken, Matthew's
Bible:The Old Testament Text of the Evangelist (BEThL 173; Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 265-66;
Werner G. Kiimmel, "Jesus und der jiidische Traditionsgedanke," ZNW 33 (1934): 125 and n. 75; Georg Eichholz, Auslegung der Bergpredigt (2nd ed.; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1970), 69-70; Reinhart Hummel, Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kirche und Judentum im Matthdusevangelium (2nd ed.; BEvT 33; Miinchen: Kaiser, 1966), 67; Leonhard Goppelt,
"Das Problem der Bergpredigt," in idem, Christologie und Ethik (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1968), 28-29; Georg Strecker, Die Bergpredigt. Ein exegetischer Kommentar (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984), 64-67; idem, "Die Antithesen der Bergpredigt (Mt
5,21-48 par)," ZNW 69 (1978): 39-47; Erich Klostermann, Das Matthdusevangelium (4th ed.;
HNT; Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1971), 42; Eduard Lohse, "Ich aber sage euch," in Der Ruf Jesu und die Antwort der Gemeinde (ed. E. Lohse, Chr. Burchard und B. Schaller; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970), 189-90; Jan Lambrecht, The Sermon on the Mount. Proclamation and Exhortation (Good News Studies 14; Wilmington, Del.: Glazier, 1985), 94-95; Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on .
.. Matthew, 1:504-5; Francis W. Beare, The Gospel according to Matthew: A Commentary (Oxford: Blackwell, 1981), 146.
25. Matt 5:33-37 has a parallel in Jas 5:12 but without the antithetic format. The first part of the premise in Matt 5:33-37 refers to swearing false oaths (5:33a), which is surpassed in the first part of the antithesis (5:34a) in the form of an apodictic command consisting of a negative infinitive (ti) 6ydoat). Similar wording in a present imperative construction is found in Jas
5:12a (i) Opvbete). While the premise 5:33a emphasizes that one should not swear a false oath, the first part of the antithesis in 34a warns not to swear at all. Matt 5:37a continues this negative prohibition with a positive demand: "Let your yes be yes and no no." The clauses in Matt 5:33a,
34a and 37a all deal with an oath by which one affirms or denies having done something. This call for honesty is found with even more clarity in Jas 5:12c. The same passage of Matt 5:33-37,
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Jesus's demands transcend or surpass the requirements of the Law rather than opposing them.26 These traditional or primary antitheses belong to Matthew's special materials, while the secondary antitheses (5:31-32, 38-39a, 43-44) have taken this form because they have been inserted into a context in which the antithetic framework was the primal one." however, also expresses an appeal to the faithfulness of one's word. The second part of the premise (5:33b) is related to keeping one's vows made before God, a command that appears to link up with the second element of the antithesis (5:34b-36). There is a shift in diction and connotation here because the thought of vows is loosely connected to the heart of the antithesis in 5:33a, 34a, 37a. Since these promissory oaths (5:33b, 34b-36) are clearly intrusive in the original context of the passage, they probably represent a later interpolation. Was this material inserted by Matthew? It is not likely since unambiguous traces of a similar secondary extension is found in a the same context in Jas 5:12b where it says "either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath" (cf. Matt 5:34, 35: "neither by heaven . . . nor by earth ... nor by Jerusalem"). James shows familiarity with both the prohibition of swearing a false oath and the promissory oaths, which implies that the process of combining the two must have taken place in the pre-Matthean tradition. See Robert A. Guelich, The Sermon on the Mount: A Foundation for Understanding (2nd ed.; Waco, Tex.: Word Publishing, 1983), 211-18; 248-50; 267-68. See also Peter H. Davids,
"Palestinian Traditions in the Epistle of James," in James the Just and Christian Origins (ed. B.
Chilton and C. A. Evans; NovTSup 98; Leiden: Brill 1999), 49.
26. See also Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on. .
. Matthew, 1:504-5; Eichholz, Auslegung der Bergpredigt, 70; Bultmann, Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition, 143-44; Werner G. Kiimmel, "Jesus und der jiidische Traditionsgedanke," ZNW 33
(1934): 125, n. 75; William D. Davies, The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1964), 101; Helmut Merklein, Die Gottesherrschaft als Handlungsprinzip: Untersuchung zur Ethik Jesu (2nd ed.; FB 33; Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1981), 260.
The text referred to in the fourth thesis is not drawn verbatim from the written Hebrew text of the Bible, but made up of a number of citations and allusions from the Torah (e.g., Exod 20:7,
16; Lev 19:12; Num 30:2; Deut 5:20; 23:22), all intending to safeguard the sanctity of God's name. Since a prohibition of this sort is considered as belonging to the Torah in a wide range of mostly parenetic Jewish materials (1 Esd 1:46; Wis 14:25; T. Ash. 2.6; Ps.-Phoc. 16; Sib. Or. 2.68; see also Sir 23:9-11; 2 En, 40.1-2), the decree may have been regarded in Matt 5:33 as a Torah prohibition (see Betz, Sermon on the Mount, 263-64).
27. The opinion arguing for the redactional character of the latter three antitheses does not rule out the possibility that their substance is traditional too. Because they present materials partially paralleled in Luke, their content is often assigned to the Q source. The third antithesis about divorce (Matt 5:32) parallels Luke 16:18; the fifth about retaliation (Matt 5:39b-43) corresponds with Luke 6;29-30, and the sixth about loving one's neighbor (Matt 5:44—48) parallels
Luke 6:27-28, 33-36. Because the antithetical form of arguing in a pattern of juxtaposed contrasting formulas is missing from the Lucan parallels, however, the antagonistic statements in these Matthean instances are generally regarded as secondary. There is widespread agreement that Matthew patterned the materials he found in Q upon the formulations of the first, second, and fourth antitheses. Moreover, the parallels in Luke enable us to ascertain that fifth and sixth
Matthean antitheses were combined at the earlier stage of the tradition in Q. It was Matthew who has separated them and who is responsible for the antithetical format of the two passages.
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
In view of the radicalizing tendency in the three primary antitheses, there can be little doubt that neither the tradition underlying Matt 5:17-20 nor its
Matthean redaction considered Jesus as having "fulfilled" the Law by setting aside, abolishing, or breaking with the Law of Moses. Such explanations come too close to meaning the opposite of 5:17. Moreover, if this is what was meant by the fulfillment of the Law in verse 17, continuity with 5:18-19 would be awkward, leaving us with the question what the "jot" and "tittle" (verse 18) and "the least of these commandments" (verse 19) would signify. There is a wide consensus among scholars that the "fulfillment" of the Law "implies that Jesus modified in some ways contemporary understandings of the Law."28 Fulfillment of the Law appears to be determined by one's interpretation of it. What is essential here is the distinction between violating the Law and fulfilling it through a different interpretation.
Emphasis in the introduction (5:17-20) is on the continuing obedience to the Torah down to the smallest details of its wording. Interestingly, these tiniest minutiae, underscoring the immutability of the Torah thus far, serve as a metaphorical designation for the least important commands in 5:19: "Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men s0, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." The reference to "one of the least of these commandments" or, better, "one of these least commandments" (piav
Tov évtol@v tobtwv tov éXaxiotwv) is to the "iota or a tittle" in 5:18.29 The "iota and tittle" represent both the smallest graphic elements of the law in a literal (verse 18) and figurative (verse 19) sense.
The phrase "the least of these commandments" in Matt 5:19 can best be understood in the light of the discussion in Jewish sources about "light" and "heavy" // "minor" and "major" commandments. Indeed, such a differentiation can be variously documented in post-biblical Jewish thought,*° not least
28. Matthias Konradt, "Die vollkommene Erfiillung der Tora und der Konflikt mit den
Pharisadern im Matthausevangelium," in Das Gesetz im friihen Judentum und im Neuen Testament (ed. D. Sanger and M. Konradt; NTOA/SUNT 57; Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
2006), 131-41. See also Graham N. Stanton, "The Origin and Purpose of Matthew's Gospel:
Matthean Scholarship from 1945 to 1980," ANRW 25.3:1937. This does not solve all our problems however, since, as Stanton makes clear, some scholars have unconvincingly attempted to explain Jesus's attitude towards the Law in Matthew by appealing to the latter's christology or eschatology; see ibid., 1934-37.
29. See Heinz Schiirmann, "Wer daher eines dieser geringsten Gebote auflést . . . Wo fand Matthaus das Logion Mt 5,192," BZ 4 (1960), 241; Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthdus:
Mt 1-7, 1:238; Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on . .. Matthew 1:496;
Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 151-52; Meier, Law and History, 91-92.
30. See above, n. 9.
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
in rabbinic discussion.3! The main point in Matt 5:19 is the importance of the light commandments. In contrast to what one would expect (in Matt 23:23 the weighty things in the law must be given precedence), it is not those who teach that the weighty commandments should be discarded who are least welcome in God's kingdom, but those who teach that the light commandments can be ignored. Although the introductory passage in Matt 5:17-20 does not pursue this topic, in 5:19 Jesus seems to reconfirm an understanding of the value of the light commandments.
Finally, Matt 5:20 serves as a pivot between 5:17-19, stating the principles for the correct interpretation of Scripture, and 5:21-48, a series of sayings expressing the intention behind biblical demands for those aspiring to enter the Kingdom: "For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." The Matthean features become particularly clear in Matt 5:20, which certainly exhibits Matthew's favorite diction.>2 Through redactional shaping Matthew seems to be countering contemporary issues of authority. The "scribes and Pharisees," his opponents, are negative counterparts to the disciples. The expression about "righteousness" being "greater" (mAeiov) than that of the scribes and Pharisees is echoed in 5:48: "You, therefore, must be perfect (téAetot), as your heavenly Father is perfect
(téXet0c)." The idea of greater righteousness is found again in the idea of perfection in 5:48 and both verses 5:20 and 48 serve to frame the six antitheses in 31. See above, n. 9. About this concept, see already Johan Wettstein, Novum Testamentum Graecum 1 (Amsterdam 1752; repr. Graz: Akademische Drucku. Verlagsanstalt, 1962),
295-96; see also Str-B 1:249, 901-2; Israel Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels (2 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1917 = New York: Ktav, 1967), 1.18-29; Efraim
Urbach, The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs (2 vols.; repr. of 2nd ed.; trans. Israel Abrahams;
Jerusalem: Magnes, 1987), 1:345-50.
32. See Ulrich Luz, "The Fulfilment of the Law in Matthew (Matt. 5:17-20)," in idem,
Studies in Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 197; published previously as "Die Erfiillung des Gesetzes bei Matthaus (Mt 5,17-20)," ZThK 75 (1978): 398-435; Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 135, 156; Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthdus: Mt 1-7, 1:230; Albert Descamps,
"Essai d'interprétation de Mt 5,17-48: Formgeschichte ou Redactionsgeschichte?," SE 1 (1959):
163; Jacques Dupont, Les Béatitudes 3: Les évangélistes (Etudes Bibliques; Paris: Gabalda, 1973),
251, n. 2; Meier, Law and History, 116-19; Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on... Matthew, 1:501.
33, See also Matt 23, where Matthew levels the usual charge of hypocrisy (vv 4-7) against the "scribes and Pharisees" and attacks the Jewish community leadership (of his own post-70
C.E, situation ?) in seven woe oracles, in which Jesus condemns the "scribes and Pharisees" seven times; see David C. Sim, The Gospel of Matthew and Christian Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community (Studies of the New Testament and Its World; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998), 130-31. See also Petri Luomanen, Entering the Kingdom of Heaven: A Study on the Structure of Matthew's View of Salvation (WUNT 2/101; Tibingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1998), 85, 120.
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
5:21-47. If Matt 5:20 has any historical value, we might deduce that rather than being commonly accepted, the light precepts were popular only in certain pious circles.
2.1.2. The Antitheses Section and Did. 3:1-6 The traditional material behind Matt 5:17-48 may have been derived from a source identical with, or similar to, the individual teknon passage. Because the instruction itself reflects the contemporary ethical sensitivity of pious Jewish circles, Jesus's demands in this part of the Sermon are likely to have a historical precedent in the Hasidic milieu. When one aligns the two texts, the parallels between Did. 3:1-6 and the early layer of Matt 5:17-48 (Matt 5:17-19, 21-22,
27-28, 33-34a) are clear. The similarities are extensive enough to establish an undeniable relationship between the two sections.
First, both sections presuppose a Decalogue background. They both treat the sixth and the seventh commandments of the Decalogue as the first two weighty commandments (murder and adultery). The Decalogue is even more likely to stand in the shadow of Matt 5:21-48 since the command to love one's neighbor found in the last unit (5:43—48) is often used in early Judaism to express in crystallized form the second table of the Decalogue.34 Rather interestingly, the items
"murder" and "adultery" (in this order) also head the rather long catalogue of prohibitions in Did. 2:1-7 and again the list of vices that serves as an explication of the Way of Death in Did. 5. Ultimately, it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that the first two on these lists, which are modeled after the second tablet of the Decalogue, are based more on tradition than the remainder, which rather seems a haphazard and free adaptation in the various lists.>5
A second point of unique agreement between Did. 3:1-6 and the early layer of the Antitheses regards the arrangement of the preamble and the first two paragraphs (the sixth and seventh commandment). The passages Did. 3:1-3 and 34. See Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Matt 19:18-19, b. Sabb. 31a; 'Abot R. Nat. B 26; Sipra
Qedoshim 2,12 and y. Ned. 9,41c; see also Van de Sandt and Flusser, The Didache: Its Jewish
Sources, 162-65.
35. The traditional list of antitheses in Matt 5:21-48 offers the two offenses, murder and adultery (5:21-22, 27-28), and the other offense—despite the fact that the Decalogue is not cited here—refers to the third commandment: "for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain" (Exod 20:7; cf. Lev 19:12; either instance forbids abuse of God's name for unworthy purposes); see Gerald Friedlander, The Jewish Sources of the Sermon on the Mount
(The Library of Biblical Studies; New York: Ktav, 1969), 61-65; Betz, Sermon on the Mount,
262; Joachim Gnilka, Das Matthdusevangelium I: Kommentar zu Kap. 1,1-13,58 (HTKNT 1/1;
Freiburg: Herder, 1986), 174; Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 212; see also Serge Ruzer, "The Technique of Composite Citation in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:21-22, 33-37)," RB 103
(1996): 72-74.
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Matt 5:17-19, 21-22, 27-28, have a corresponding topical organization. Their introduction is similar to the saying that a light commandment is as important as a weighty one. This is the fundamental essence of Jewish Derek Eres teachings. Both Did. 3:1 and Matt 5:17-19 warn against committing even the slightest transgression. To prevent people from ignoring light commandments or committing light transgressions, the linkage of these minor items with the weighty ones is elucidated. Should one violate a light precept, one ends up committing a grave sin. Being bad tempered or angry leads to murder and a lustful person is likely to end up committing adultery (Did. 3:2-3; cf. Matt 5:21-22, 27-28).
Finally, both sections, Did. 3:1-6 and Matt 5:17-19, 21-22, 27-28, 3334a, draw the same conclusions along the same line of reasoning. They share the method of applying the principle laid down in the preamble (Did. 3:1 and Matt 5:17-19). Did. 3:2-6 repeatedly asserts that minor sins lead to major ones.
The kind of argumentation used here is a minori ad maius (1M1M 9p), presupposing that what is known about something "light" can be known "all the more so" about something "heavy." One can hardly doubt that the first, second and fourth antitheses in Matthew presuppose the same logical method. Matthew has
Jesus explain that the original intention of the prohibition of murder, adultery and oaths was to include all attitudes and actions that potentially lead to such acts. The disposition of such explanations is clearly from the light to the weighty demands, from the lesser to the greater commandments. In Matt 5:17-19, we face the transparent principles of hermeneutics that are applied to the traditional commandments of the Scripture in 5:21-48. When Matthew has Jesus demand that the disciples' righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees
(5:20), he not only validates the continuance of the Torah (verse 18) but also the keeping of the "least of these commandments" (verse 19). The saying provides the critical principle by which the Law is to be read, interpreted and evaluated within the early milieu of Derek Eres and, as explained above, within the circles in which the Two Ways and Matt 5:17-48 were originally kept alive.
2.2, THE LETTER OF JAMES
James is mostly viewed as a redactional work, composed of traditional material that was applied with tremendous freedom to a new context and argument.
This does not necessarily imply, however, that the casting of these materials lacks a coherent structure. For our purpose it is important to know that the various topics broached in the opening chapter are subsequently expanded in the letter body. Some scholars have even suggested that the opening chapter is the key to understanding the letter in its entirety.4° To be more specific with respect to our
36. According to Luke T. Johnson, the chapter is "something of an epitome of the work as a whole"; see his The Letter of James (AB 37A; New York: Doubleday, 1995), 174-75. According
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
investigation, it is important to notice that the correlation drawn between desire, sin, and death in Jas 1:13-15 and 1:19-21 is further developed in 4:1-6 where the origin of strife is located in the human pursuit of their own pleasures.37 In 1:14-15 James champions man's accountability for sin and returns to this theme later in 4:1-4 where he shows more fully how such distorted desire leads to the death of others.
2.2.1. The Letter of James and Did. 3:1-6 In order to evaluate the points of contact between the Didache unit and James properly, it is particularly instructive to study the brief passages in Jas 1:1315 and 1:19-21. Considering Jas 1:13-15, three points may be noted. First, we find the vice ém@vpia ("desire") in both James and the teknon section. Whereas the noun ém6vypia and the adjective émOvpntis in Did. 3:3 specifically describe sexual passions, the context of the word émOvpia in James suggests a broader concept. It appears to highlight individual responsibility for sin. In accordance with the teknon passage, however, the term's sexual connotation is developed in Jas 1:14-15 with vivid metaphors. "Desire" is personified as a seductive female who, having actively enticed the person referenced in verse 14, conceives a bastard child by him.
Second, James describes the consequence of desire in terms of giving birth: personified Desire gives birth to (tixtet) sin, and sin brings forth (amoxvet) death
(1:15). The teknon section uses similar "birthing" language in connection with the major sins in the second part (the "d" clauses) of its symmetrical strophes.38
Third, the concatenated form is found in both Jas 1:14-15 and in Did. 3:1-6. Like
Jas 1:14-15, the teknon section encapsulates its teaching with a chain-like structure carrying the thought from step to step: "be not angry, for anger . . ." and "be not desirous, for desire..." . to Mark E. Taylor and George H. Guthrie, it "functions as a summary of the major concerns and themes expanded in the body of the letter"; see their "The Structure of James," CBQ 68 (2006):
688. Many other scholars "are convinced that ch. 1 holds the key to the letter's structure"; see
Mark E. Taylor, "Recent Scholarship on the Structure of James," Currents in Biblical Research
3 (2004): 112.
37. See Matt A. Jackson-McCabe, Logos and Law in the Letter of James: The Law of Nature, the Law of Moses, and the Law of Freedom (NovTSup 100; Leiden: Brill, 2001), 206-8.
38. As seen above, however, James prefers the terms tiktw and dnoxvéw in this context rather than the usual verb yevvaw as employed in the teknon section. He keeps restating his source in his own words and thus developed it as his own teaching; John S. Kloppenborg, "The Reception of the Jesus Traditions in James," in The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition (ed. J.
Schlosser; BETL 176; Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 116-21. The verb anoxvéw ("to bear young") is also used in 1:18, but with respect to the unusual female image for God as "the father of light" who gives birth.
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
In 1:19-20 the initial result of human ém@vpia is specified as anger (Opy"):
"Let every man be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger, for the anger of man does not work the righteousness of God." These verses not only give some first detailed information about the content of ém6vpia mentioned in 1:14-15, but the formal characteristic of the figure also connects the two passages. The form of these two passages is best designated as concatenation because they repeat one word from the preceding phrase. In Jas 1:14-15 the catenated form of "desire" and "sin" leads to death while the chain-syllogism in Jas 1:19-20 draws attention to the result of anger: "(Let every man be) slow to anger (6pyrv), for the anger (Opyn) of man does not work the righteousness of God." The clauses might easily recall Did. 3:2ab: "Be not angry (11) yivov dpyioc), for anger (Opyn) leads to murder (gdévov)."
Jas 1:21 also reflects elements of the teknon section (esp. Did. 3:1) but space does not allow me to go into this matter here.39 In any case, when all of these parallels are considered, the general case for a relationship between Jas 1:13-15,
19-21 and Did. 3:1-6 seems strong.
2.2.2. James 2:8-11 and the Law The main section on the law in James's letter is 2:8-11.4° The passage shows a similar ethical interest in the law as does the segment found in Did. 3:1-6 and the ancient kernel of Derek Eres literature. The text runs as follows:
8. If you really fulfill the royal Law according to the Scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well. 9. But if you show partiality
(mpoownoAnpnteite), you commit a sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point (év évi) has become guilty of all of it. 11. For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not kill." If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor of the Law.
Jas 2:1-5 warns readers not to be partial in their assemblies. Proof comes in two main sections, verses 5—7 and verses 8-11, and we find a renewed admonition in 2:12-13. The first section endorsing the argument consists of three rhetorical
39. For more evidence, see Huub van de Sandt, "James 4,1-4 in the Light of the Jewish
Two Ways Tradition 3,1-6," Bib 88 (2007): 38-63.
40, According to Wesley H. Wachob, Jas 2:1-13 "is the Jamesian argument that says more about the law than any other in the letter"; see The Voice of Jesus in the Social Rhetoric of James
(SNTSMS 106; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 127. For the following, see also
Van de Sandt, "James 4,1-4," 56-58.
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
questions (verses 5—6a, 6b, 7) each of which anticipates an affirmative response.*!
The second section (verses 8-11) seeks to prove that a sin such as is represented by "partiality" (tpoownoAnpyia) is a violation of the Torah. Apparently the readers of the letter did not experience it that way. This lack of consciousness regarding the equivalence of "major" and "minor" precepts might have encouraged James to act.
James makes the love commandment a significant criterion by which all action should be measured. In verses 8-943 he emphasizes that those who claim to live within the kingdom defined by the "royal" law of love cannot practice partiality. In James's opinion, observance of the Torah without love is as inconceivable as the neglect of minor commandments. In verses 10-11 he argues that failure to obey "one point" (év évi) of the law is equivalent to failing all of it. To be sure, the command against partiality ("one point") is connected to the contemporary standard Jewish view of the unity of the law.44 James suggests that favoritism be condemned as severely by the law as adultery or even murder. This argument concurs with the common Jewish distinction between minor and major commandments.*5 Seemingly negligible minor commandments, like the prohibition of partiality, are included within the scope of the commandment not to commit adultery and not to kill.4° Interestingly—and this will be discussed below—in Jas
4 the writer declares that the readers do kill (4:2) and commit adultery (4:4).
41. Privileged treatment of the rich stands in stark contrast to God who has chosen the poor to be "rich in faith." Moreover, acts of partiality are against self interest (verses 6-7).
42. It is unlikely that 2:8 refers to the love commandment as one commandment among others. Rather, it is the commandment that summarizes the entirety of the law, "royal" because it summarizes the law as the law of the kingdom of God (see 2:5). See also Matthias Konradt in this volume.
43. These verses are clearly antithetical. The contrast between verse 8 and verse 9 is of "really" keeping the law of love (verse 8) while at the same time disobeying one of its stipulations (verse 9).
44. In fact, James agrees with a traditional Jewish view that "whoever violates one commandment, will end up by violating them all" as evidenced in verse 11. See for instance Martin
Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James (trans. M. A. Williams; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975), 144-46 with reference to b. Hor. 8b and elsewhere. See also Yizhak
Baer, "The Historical Foundations of the Halakha," Zion 27 (1962): 127-28 (Hebrew).
45. See Dibelius, James: A Commentary, 144-45 and n. 113; Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle of James: An Introduction and Commentary (TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 95.
46. This law's approach is also emphasized in Jas 4:11-12:
Do not speak evil against one another, brethren. He that speaks evil against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law.
But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and destroy. But who are you that you judge your neighbor?
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
James 2:8-11 is thus most naturally in accordance with Did. 3:1-6, which begins with: "My child, flee from all evil and from everything resembling it?
This basic rule is designed to prevent indulging in sin and is the central moral preventative reflected in Yir'at Het. The warning in Jas 2:8-11 was probably indispensable "because of the tendency to think that obedience to the 'heavier' commandments outweighed any failure to adhere to the 'lighter' requirements of the law."47 Because James's readers might have lost the ability to assess the value of the minor commandments properly, he removes any grounds someone might have for a light-hearted attitude toward the prohibition against partiality. In his mind, "to show contempt for the poor is equivalent to committing adultery or even murder."48
In conclusion, both James and the Matthean Antitheses stand close to the ethos of the teknon section in stressing the unity of the law as an ethical code. The three passages, Did. 3:1-6; Matt 5:17-48 and Jas 2:8-11, are analogous in taking the sixth and seventh commandment of the Decalogue as the first two weighty commandments (murder and adultery). Matthew and James contain an interpretation of these commandments (Matt 5:21-22, 27-28; Jas 2:10-11) when urging the necessity of carrying out the full stipulations of the law (see Jas 2:10 and Matt
5:18-19). Matthew 5:19 considers the relaxation of the law in its least important commandments as nonobservance of the law in its totality, while Jas 2:10 equates breaking even one point of the law with breaking it entirely. To be sure, the "one point" in which James's readers were falling short—partiality—could be called a "light" requirement. Practicing partiality boils down to committing murder and adultery. The thinking in Did. 3:1-6; Matt 5:17-19, 21-22, 27-28 and Jas 2:8-11 amounts to exactly the same thing insofar as these passages specify moral norms based on properly interpreted law.*?
One cannot pick and choose which commandments to keep. It is utterly wrong to disregard some prohibitions while obeying the others. Slandering is likely to have been taken as a minor transgression here. According to James, however, one sets oneself above the Law in deciding with which commands to comply and which not to observe. Since one excludes the weight of a minor sin like slander, one claims for oneself God's role as the ultimate lawgiver.
47. Moo, Epistle of James, 95.
48. Patrick J. Hartin, James (SP 14; Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press 2003), 137. See the Venerable Bede (672/3-735) according to Johnson, Letter of James, 233.
49. The content of the law is understood from the perspective of the commandment to love one's neighbor as summarizing the law in toto. The halakah was to be expounded within the parameters of the love commandment. The strong emphasis on love (5:43) does not abolish concern for the observance of specific regulations and precepts, but it does imply a definite shift in focus and priorities. See also Did, 1:3-3:10 all of which is placed under the fundamental principle of the love command formulated in 1:2.
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
3. A CHARACTERISTIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRADITION
IN BOTH MATTHEW AND JAMES
The structure and themes of the teachings in Matt 5:17-48 can be accounted for in a meaningful way within the framework of pious Jewish thought. After mentioning that entering the kingdom of heaven requires someone to "add to righteousness," the logion of Matt 5:20 introduces the intensification of the commandments in 5:21—48. Jesus rejects a minimalistic understanding of the weighty commandments. The saying makes clear that doing the will of God or traveling the Way to Life implies strict observance not only of the major commandments, but of the minor ones as well. The Matthean Jesus based his interpretation of Scripture on the theological insight current within Hasidic circles into the basic intention of the Legislator.
In his treatment of the minor sins, however, Jesus's argument in Matthew seems rather more rigorous than is the line of reasoning in the Two Ways or in the early stratum of Derek Eres. Although the loss of temper, a lustful look, or the taking of an oath do not replace acts of murder, adultery, and perjury, they are valued in the Antitheses as sins in their own right, incurring the same penalty as murder or adultery. The passage in Did. 3:1-3 and, for example, Yir'at Het II,1617, however, object to anger and desire (or lust) because they lead to major sins.
The latter teachings appear largely to represent preventive measures to protect someone from transgressing weighty commandments. A bad-tempered or lustful person runs the risk of ending up committing murder or adultery. Attention does not seem focused here on the minor sins of infuriation or desire, but on the perils of the grave sins of murder and adultery.
Thus the tenor of the Antitheses section is more rigorous than the ethical standards prevalent in the pious environment of the Hasidim. Matthew's Jesus does not explicitly highlight the active observance of minor commands with a view to avoiding the major ones. In 5:21-22, 27-28, 33-34a he attaches equal moral significance to being angry with one's brother and to killing him, to looking lustfully at a woman and to committing adultery with her, to taking oaths and perjury. Jesus made a strong enforcement and a high liability felt to his audience by equating the gravity of obviously more innocent and minor offences with the major legal transgressions. In this way he was able to set more store by the minor commandments than was common in early Derek Eres circles. Jesus's spiritual reorientation of the halakah, although in line with the Hasidim, is clearly perceptible in the introductory passage in Matt 5:17-19 where he urges his disciples to carry out the Law down to the very jot and tittle.
In James a similar radicalization may be noticed; I refer to Jas 4:1-4. The passage points out that wars (16epor) and battles (udayat) were being fought among the readers of the letter. They are even accused of murder, an almost intolerably strong charge when written to a Christian community. Finally, the author
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
charges those who are engaged in warfare and killing with being "adulteresses" in 4:4.50
It is of importance to remember here that the relevant background of Jas 4:1-6 is found in Jas 1:14-15 and 1:19-21, two passages that in their turn are closely related to the teknon section Did. 3:1-6. James champions human responsibility for sin in the first chapter of his letter and returns to this theme later in 4:1-4 where he shows more fully how such distorted desire leads to violence and murder. Moreover, he builds his accusations around the contrasts of two ways of life: one led in friendship with God, the other in friendship with the world (4:4).
Let us focus on some details. In Jas 4:1 conflicting selfish desires (minor vice) are the source of wars and battles (major offence). James probably rearranged traditional material here by rephrasing it as rhetorical questions, a stylistic feature frequently found in this letter.5! In consonance with the tendency exhibited in Did. 3:1-6, however, he asserts that hedonistic pleasures and internal passions lead to violence.52
This very same pattern probably underlies Jas 4:2 as well. In order to see this, the two phrases "you murder" and "you battle and wage war" should be regarded as resulting from the preceding observations in this verse, namely, "you desire" and "you are jealous." Thus, in the Greek text of Jas 4:2, one should place a full stop after "you murder":53
50. It is useful to assess these verses in their literary context. The passage in Jas 4:1-4 belongs to the division 4:1-6, which in turn is part of the coherent literary unit Jas 3:13-4:10.
The latter section is composed of four subsections, an exposition presenting the distinction
James makes between two types of wisdom, the one from above and the other from below
(3:13-18), an accusation in which the author strongly criticizes what can be labeled a life led without wisdom (4:1-6), a call to repentance (4:7-10), and finally some concrete practical advice is given (4:11-12). Because a detailed treatment of Jas 4:1-6 is beyond the scope of this article, attention will be paid solely to some basic points.
51. Compare also 3:6 (2:4, 5, 6, 7, 14, 15, 16, etc). Note the wording év toic péAeowv as well.
This might refer to Jas 3:5, where it says: "the tongue is a small member (uxpdv péAoo), yet it boasts of great things."
52. Because the terms ém@vpeiv and CnAodv were used interchangeably in his days (see
Johnson, Letter of James, 271; Jackson-McCabe, Logos and Law, 204), James might have understood the term (nAwrtij¢ in the teknon section as "jealous" or "desirous."
53. Modern editions of the Greek New Testament, however, do not seem to support this conclusion. Instead of a coherent literary pattern substantiating this line of thought, Jas 4:2 often is divided into three disconnected statements: a. You desire (émOvupeite) and do not have; b. you murder and are jealous ({yAodte) and are unable to obtain; c. you battle and wage war.
The structure of the passage evidences a haphazard arrangement of a number of isolated vices and severe misdemeanors apparently applicable to the community. Moreover, the expression
"you murder" does not fit well with the following "you are envious" (CnAodte). The difficulties resolve themselves when one assumes that the author picks up here ideas planted earlier in Jas
LAW AND ETHICS IN MATTHEW AND JAMES
a. You desire (ém@vpeite) and do not have, so you murder. b. And you are jealous ({nAodte) and are unable to obtain, so you battle and wage war.
The punctuation adopted here breaks the verse into two statements, each with a cause and effect.54
For our purposes, it is of great importance to note that Jas 4:2 closely corresponds with the form of moral exhortation in the teknon passage. The connection between envy, jealousy, and murder is also found in Did. 3:1-6. As seen above, the latter section is bent on highlighting that transgression of minor precepts leads to the transgression of major ones. In Jas 4:2 the same path is depicted:
"desire eventuates in murder" and "jealousy results in war."55
Not just Jas 4:1-2 but also the entire arrangement of Jas 4:1-4 shows James's awareness of a tradition like the teknon section. The author reserves some of his harshest invectives for those who pursue their own desires, addressing them as "adulteresses" (roryadidec). In Did. 3:2-3, being angry, jealous, eager for battle, and hot-tempered are all connected to murder while a lascivious or lustful person
(émOvpnt)s) is tied to adultery (poryeia);>° these are the topics treated by James in 1:14-15, 19-20 and 4:1-4.
On the other hand, the style of Jas 4:1-4 is quite different from the more moderate approach of Jewish sages as reflected in Derek Eres and the teknon section. James deviates from the conventional topic by suggesting that these battles are being fought just then by his readers. Thus his letter refers not to a potential, but to an actual, real and tangible situation. Severe violence is already in evidence among them. The situation among his readers seems to have gotten seriously out of hand. He accuses his addressees of being engaged in warfare and other conflicts (4:1-2). They are "killers" (4:2) and "adulteresses" (4:4).
1:13-15, 19-21. The two statements, "you murder" and "you battle and wage war" follow as a result of "you desire" and "you are jealous."
54. Similar punctuation can also be found in Joseph B. Mayor, The Epistle of St. James:
The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Comments (1897; repr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1954), 134-7; James H. Ropes, The Epistle of St James (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1916), 254;
Johnson, The Letter of James, 267, 277.
55. In addition to these statements a psychological judgment is also found here which explains the transition from a minor to a weighty sin. The additions "(you) do not have" and "(you) are unable to obtain" in 4:2 indicate that untrammeled desires for pleasure and passions turn out to be unsatisfied and, thus, lead eventually to murder, social upheaval, battles and war.
56. Unlike the variety of light transgressions in the two halves of the separate strophes, the same weighty offense is repeatedly retained in each of the two halves, with the exception of 3:3 where the weighty sin is expressed in two different words ("fornication" and "adultery"). It is, however, hard to believe that the term "fornication" was used in the earlier layer of GTW 3:1-6 since "adultery" and not "fornication" is mentioned in the second part of the Decalogue. For further argumentation, see Van de Sandt, "James 4,1-4," 60, n. 65.
MATTEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
The pointed absurdity of the allegations in James 4:1-4 offers a clue to their ultimate intention. Since James argued in 2:8-11 that breaking any command amounts to violating the whole law, it follows that the "minor transgressions" are judged in terms of the most extreme consequences possible. James understands those actions in Did. 3:1-6 that might result in strife, war, murder, or adultery as being as equally grave as major transgressions. He assesses the minor transgressions of his addressees as major transgressions. When his readers allow themselves to be carried away by their passions, give in to desires and are jealous, it is just as if they had waged war or committed murder. James's discussion is based less on the supposed activities of his addressees than on his intensification of the argument in the teknon section. In James's moral approach to the law, armed conflict, murder, and adultery take place among his readers because they allow desire to entice them into minor offences.
4. CONCLUSION
The demands of Jesus in the Antitheses and accusations of James in his Letter are rooted in a Jewish Hasidic milieu. The stricter interpretation of the commandments implying a definite shift of moral focus, presents an attitude to life that is beneficial to one's neighbor and emphasizes a more generous, positive attitude towards people throughout (Matt 5:43-48; Jas 2:8). In stressing the minor commandments of the law as an ethical code, the core of which is the principle of neighborly love (Matt 5:43-48; Jas 2:8; cf. Did. 1:2), the teaching of the Matthean Antitheses and James's Letter stand close to the ethos of the wider stream of pietistic Judaism.
The matching outlook of James and Matthew on the subject of the law must be accounted for with a source similar to the Two Ways 3:1-6. The distinctiveness of James and Matthew, however, emerges in the radicalization of the teaching. The individual sayings in Matthew's Antitheses—almost substituting anger for murder, lust for adultery, etc.—are primarily presented as an interpretation of biblical commandments, whereas James—charging those who are partial, biased, envious, jealous, and desirous with being "killers" and "adulteresses" —offers simple and straightforward accusations. The fact that Matthew and James both independently transmuted and radicalized a similar Jewish teknon tradition is likely the result of their very close ties with a community or network of like-minded communities in which these highly refined ethical standards were prevalent. We are dealing here with an ethical intensification that at that time may have represented a new step to attaining moral perfection (Matt 5:48; Jas
1:4).
PART 5
OBSERVING RITUALS
> <'
Ce ' aS _ a ~*~ i a7
ee +
i a id a
| q r a, © & , © ¥ = .
* i) aval G '
' a — Ve o.21% o®@ | ' ew tg - _ » "
_- :
OTS wa
PUBS Ot'
$4, salt
Vata ide ee NP wv?
diate) Soma, Ge wege lg Arr te 4 Ged bemenke eT ee ma (Abed, "od beads Poe De id are aon ; a? ee Ce dale Bb .
"7 nus oth 2. on Qe pk tte den :
. sobes anal ge Gre Veit bg
¢ iwtiwe F Aa Y, aay _
'4 hy egy, pee + peel ie iss Ly ° '4
T y e
\s =
ia boa All a A easy fey ty tg, Cees Siteey He be ne ev easels "Ty ind Tales Yoga 2 pine hits Weir ep Oa te' is he ation, | ns ee ' is » a + a ioe e * ad - "i : hai ° Gat. am :
Amtoxvnoic Adyw aAnOeiac: PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND THE DIDACHE
Alistair Stewart-Sykes Certain common themes between Matthew, James and the Didache are not difficult to discern! but direct comparison is complicated by the differing overarching genres of the three documents. Nonetheless, in spite of the distinct genres, there is a subgenre, or rather, as I will suggest, a subspecies of a genre, that appears in all three, that is to say that all three contain elements of paraenesis. The purpose of this paper is to explore the paraenetic content of the three documents in the light of another common trait, namely, the practice of baptism.
Obviously the practice of baptism does not set the communities that produced these documents apart from other early Christian communities, but an identification in the Didache of pre-baptismal instruction, which may properly be described as paraenetic, allows us to note parallels within the other works that in turn shed light on the rhetorical strategies that they employ.
1. DEFINING PARAENESIS
Paraenesis in modern scholarly discourse has been notably difficult to define. My allotted space might readily be filled with analysis of the various arguments, and so my treatment will be cursory to the point of being curt. The term is effectively defined by Ps-Isocrates in Ad Demonicum, when he states that, in a protreptikos logos, paraenesis is preferable to paraklésis. What this means is expanded in what follows when he says that he is writing to advise Demonicus on the objects to which the young should aspire, on the actions from which they
1. Beyond the papers from the conference in this volume, see, e.g., Ralph P. Martin, James
(WBC 48; Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1988), lxxiv-Ixxvi; Massey H. Shepherd jr., "The Epistle of James and the Gospel of Matthew," JBL 75 (1956): 40-51 (who also brings the Didache into his account); Gunnar Garleff, Urchristliche Identitat in Matthdusevangelium, Didache und Jakobusbrief (Beitrage zum Verstehen der Bibel 9; Miinster: Lit, 2004) who, while he discusses the documents separately, allows us to observe relationships between the three.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
should abstain, with what sort of people they should associate and the manner in which they should regulate their lives. In other words, Ps-Isocrates is sending a logos protreptikos in which paraenesis, that is to say ethical advice, rather than simple exhortation, predominates. It was on this basis that Burgess classified paraenesis alongside protreptic.? It is not, however, a genre as such. Possibly it is a subgenre, or perhaps even a subspecies of protreptic, for the logos protreptikos is itself a species of the genos sumbouleutikon.4 Possibly we may read Ps-Isocrates as stating that the primary mark of paraenesis is stylistic rather than generic,° as this would account for the different contexts in which paraenesis comes to appear. But above all we should be aware that a (rhetorically constructed) hostility to rhetoric and an implicit claim of the superiority of philosophy lies behind this statement. Paraenesis amounts to protreptic given by a philosopher rather than a rhetorician.
But even as Burgess was writing, some understanding of paraenesis as a genre in itself was coming about, a view given classical expression by Dibelius.®
However, as such, we may note that not only is it without ancient definition but that, beyond, perhaps, Ad Demonicum itself, there is no extant example of a paraenesis pure and simple." We may, moreover, note Ps-Libanius's definition of a paraenetic letter as urging (tpotpémovtec) somebody to embrace or to avoid a course of action,® again implying a proximity to protreptic.
Scholarship seems to have come full circle, therefore, when Popkes, on the basis of the semantic use of the term and its cognates in ancient literature and the contexts to which paraenesis is addressed defines the basic function of paraenesis as the promotion of "attitudes and actions which secure the future of the recipient, both short and long-range. The present time is a time of decision which 2. Demon. 1.1.
3. Theodore C. Burgess, "Epideictic Literature," The University of Chicago Studies in Classical Philology 3 (1902): 226-28.
4. On the three genera see Aristotle, Rhet. 3.1-3. Symbouleutic rhetoric is defined as either hortatory or dissuasive (npotpom or dnotpom}) in much the same way that Ps-Libanius, centuries later, defines napaivnoic.
5. So, similarly Troels Engberg-Pedersen, "The Concept of Paraenesis," in Early Christian
Paraenesis in Context (ed. J. Starr and T. Engberg-Pedersen; BZNW 125; Berlin: de Gruyter,
2004), 61.
6. Martin Dibelius, Der Brief des Jakobus (11th ed.; rev. H. Greeven; Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964), 16-23. There is, perhaps, some basis for this in Isocrates' admission that in Nic. the subjects did not flow as such, as each was under a distinct heading (Antid.
67-68), but this was nonetheless more than a random scattering of thoughts.
7. So Wiard Popkes, "Paraenesis in the New Testament: An Exercise in Conceptuality," in Early Christian Paraenesis (ed. J. Starr and T. Engberg-Pedersen), 15.
8. Ps-Libanius Epistolary styles, 5. See Abraham J. Malherbe, Ancient Epistolary Theorists
(SBLSBS 19; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988), 66-81.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
implies an element of transition. Someone has come into a state of reshaping his or her future and now needs competent advice."?
Nonetheless, the term may mean, in a general rather than a generic sense, "ethical encouragement and advice." Thus Malherbe identifies five aspects of paraenesis that he considers defining, namely, that paraenesis is conventional teaching rather than new or original material;!° that it is general in application;!! that it is frequently repetition of what is already known, intended to make the hearer act on prior knowledge;!? that a significant figure in paraenesis is the paradeigma, the example held up for imitation or for avoidance;!3 and, closely related to this, that this is communication from a respected figure closely acquainted with a more-junior disciple.!4 Whereas all of these may be marks of persuasive literature, which may be called paraenetic, using the term as meaning
"ethical encouragement and exhortation," and whereas as such it may be useful to observe such marks, they are not to be employed as defining generic terms since, as Malherbe himself is aware, they are part of a generalized ethical communicative koiné.!5
Further comment on defining paraenesis is forthcoming from Perdue. He notes that in fictive settings at least the occasion for the imparting of paraenesis may be the death or departure of the teacher or a change in status of the person addressed. However, he also notes, in keeping with Malherbe's observation that the content of the paraenesis may be known already to the hearer, that the occasion for its delivery is an important step, and that it serves to remind the hearer of his original incorporation into a group.!® Perdue's fundamental point, however, is that paraenesis comes to the fore in situations of liminality. Once again we are forced back to the close relationship of paraenesis and protreptic. Nonetheless, whereas protreptic is primarily addressed to an uncommitted audience, paraenesis is speech to the unconverted moreso than to the half-converted,!7
9. Popkes, "Paraenesis in the New Testament," 17.
10. Abraham J. Malherbe, "Hellenistic Moralists and the New Testament," ANRW 26.1:
280 with reference to Nic. 40-41.
11. Ibid., 289, with reference to Seneca Ep. 94. 32-35.
12. Ibid., 280-281, with reference to Seneca Ep. 94. 25; 94. 21; Dio Chrysostom, Ordin.
17.2.
13. Ibid., 282-83, with reference to Demon. 8-11.
14. Ibid., 285-87, with particular reference to the relationship between Seneca and Lucilius.
15. Engberg-Pedersen, "Concept of Paraenesis," 60, also suggests that there is more (or less) to paraenesis than simply the general ethical commune of the ancient world.
16. Leo Perdue, "Paraenesis and the Epistle of James," ZNW 72 (1981): 247-48.
17. The distinction made by Stanley K. Stowers, Letter-writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (LEC 5; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986), 91-96. John G. Gammie, "Paraenetic Literature:
Towards the Morphology of a Secondary Genre," in Paraenesis: Act and Form (ed. L. Perdue and J. G. Gammie; Semeia 50; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 43, 53-54, disputes this by sug-
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
and as such to persons setting out on a liminal stage of being.!® In other words, whereas a liminal situation might not be definitory of paraenesis, it is a primary context in which such discourse might be found, and if discourse that would otherwise appear paraenetic is clearly addressed to a situation of liminality then we have greater assurance of the classification. One may note here that Ps-Libanius distinguishes paraenesis from what he calls sumbouleutic discourse (of which I have suggested, actually, that this is a subspecies) on the grounds that paraenesis does not admit of contradiction.!9 As such, this compares readily with Austin's distinction between illocutionary and perlocutionary acts.2° Thus the heavy presence of conventional maxims that, according to Aristotle, are best used in speech addressed from a senior to a junior,?! could well be an indication of paraenesis, in that the situation of the audience is that of learning as neophytes and the social setting is thus more likely to turn an illocution into a perlocution, and given that there are precepts that do not admit of contradiction.2* However the presence of maxims should not of itself be definitory.?3
We thus conclude, in agreement with Perdue, that "protrepsis and paraenesis refer . .
. to two distinct, but connected, stages along the way to virtue: entrance to the path of life and continuance in the course undertaken."*4 Thus, in Isocratean terms, pure paraklésis is unnecessary, but calmer advice and guidance is needed. This is a definition and distinction that not only does proper justice to the evidence but, perhaps more importantly, is of heuristic value. The heugesting that some literary works that might be paraenetic are addressed to a mixed audience.
This is less than relevant, however, as these are literary works rather than actual paraenetic speech.
18. It is the failure to observe these stages that mars the suggestion of James Starr )"Was
Paraenesis for Beginners?" in Starr and Engberg-Pedersen, eds., Early Christian Paraenesis,
73-111), that paraenesis is aimed at those who are more advanced. Thus in observing what
Hebrews says of initial learning (p. 108), he is actually observing initial protreptic rather than paraenesis proper. See also n, 25 below.
19, Ps-Libanius, Epistolary styles 5. The distinction is perhaps comparable to those types of letters described by Ps-Demetrius as vovBetntiKd<¢ and ovpPovdevtiKds (Ps-Demetrius, Eloc., 7 and 11; see Malherbe, Ancient Epistolary Theorists, 30-41).
20. John L. Austin, How To Do Things with Words (2nd ed.; Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1975), 102-8.
21. Rhet. 2.21.
22. So Seneca, Ep. 94. 43.
23. As Gammie, "Paraenetic Literature" makes it. In doing so he is heavily influenced, it seems, by Seneca Ep. 95.1, which refers to "haec pars philosophiae quam Graeci paraeneticen vocant, nos praeceptivam dicimus"; this letter, however, needs to be read carefully and critically as it is an engagement in the Stoic discussion of the validity of non-argued statements.
24. Leo G. Perdue, "The Social Character of Paraenesis and Paraenetic Literature," in Perdue and Gammie, eds., Paraenesis: Act and Form, 24. Similarly Stowers, LetterWriting in Greco-Roman Antiquity, 91-96.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
ristic value of the classification comes about when an identification of discourse as paraenetic allows us insights into the situation of the hearers, or attunes us to clues to the situation of the hearer(s) that otherwise might be missed, rather than when the situation of the hearer(s) is known and we are therefore able to identify paraenesis on that basis. If the possible presence of paraenesis alerts us to a liminal life-setting that can in turn be demonstrated from other literary clues, not only have we succeeded in a classification, but more importantly we are able to see how the discourse fits the hearers. Thus, in seeking paraenesis in Matthew,
James, and the Didache, we specifically seek ethical exhortation that betrays an element of liminality as the context for the recipients, thus being aware in the first instance of the relationship obtaining between this and protreptic, and, having observed this, we may see if the situation of the hearers is consistent with that form of address. With regard to the other observed features that attach more to paraenesis as generalized moral discourse, we may seek to observe such features as are noticed by Malherbe without in any way making them determinative as to whether any given passage is technically paraenetic.
In general, we may readily recognize the Two Ways section of the Didache as paraenetic. We may recognize it, moreover, as specifically so, for beyond its ethical content, and beyond its generalizing tone and relative lack of specificity, it is, I need hardly argue, intended as a pre-baptismal address, setting out the conditions for behavior for one who is to be baptized in this community. As such it functions quasi-protreptrically and in a socially formative manner, in other words paraenetically, in instructing the addressee in preparation for his or her baptism. By having this assured understanding, moreover, of the social and religious function of this instruction, we are equipped to understand the appearance of similar material elsewhere in which the context of the hearers is less clear.25
Thus, turning to Matthew we may likewise recognize the content of Matt 5-7 as generally and unspecifically paraenetic. The question of whether it is specifically so is less certain, as in its fictive narrative setting there is nothing that readily indicates that it is intended as protreptic. However, there are two arguments that lead me to suggest that this is the original setting of the unit. The first derives from Hartman's suggestion that the instruction to teach all nations in the context of baptism refers back to the content of teaching that is to be found
25. This in turn is what enables us to see that Starr's denial in "Was Paraenesis for Beginners?" that paraenesis is intended principally for those at an early stage in their moral or religious journey is hopeless; he is unable to deny that this is the function of the Two Ways material in the Didache. At 109-10 he refers to Huub van de Sandt and David Flusser, The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and Its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (CRINT 3/5; Assen:
Van Gorcum, 2002), 31, to support his suggestion that the function of this material extended beyond that stated, but there is no support there, as discussion at this point concerns the document as a whole.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
within the first Gospel.26 Principal among these blocks of teaching is that found at Matt 5-7. In particular there is reference within this block to the Two Ways tradition: "Enter by the narrow gate, for one gate is wide and the way is spacious which leads to destruction,"27 an exhortation that leads rapidly to an eschatological conclusion. As such, and on the assumption that Matthew and the Didache share at least a Traditionskreis, we may suggest that the Two Ways tradition, in its use as pre-baptismal instruction, has worked some influence here.
Secondly, quite apart from verbal parallels, there is a substantial degree of content in common between the Two Ways chapters of the Didache and Matt 5.
Both redefine the extent of application of the commandments and both preach reliance upon God for all things; the substantial degree of confluence, moreover, between Did. 1:2-5 and Matt 5 hardly needs comment. I suggest that this material was circulating in the context of versions of the Two Ways employed in pre-baptismal catechesis.
Within this block of teaching there are nonetheless, it may be noted, a variety of forms. In particular a cultic didache may be found within the block of teaching, that itself has numerous points of contact, as well as difference, with the cultic instructions of the Didache following the direction to baptize, namely, directions on fasting and on prayer.28 We may see this as circulating independently and being placed secondarily within what is effectively an epitome of Jesus's teaching.?9 All this may be the work of the redactor of the first Gospel, but the Traditionskreis lying behind it is bound up to the nexus of baptismal preparation.
To turn to James, there is no question that in the most general sense the epistle is paraenetic, indeed Dibelius classified James as a paraenetic text, "a stringing together of admonitions of general ethical conduct."3° Insofar as Dibelius was speaking of a genre the very mark of which was an absence of order, we must, of course, deny such a characterization, but the content is nonetheless largely ethical and there are, moreover, a number of features identified by Malherbe as part of the lingua franca of Hellenistic ethical discourse. Thus, the fictive author is a person of agreed authority, the exhortation is general rather than particular, and paradeigmata are employed. What is less clear is the extent to which the epistle is paraenetic insofar as the term may be understood in indicating protrep26. Lars Hartman, Into the Name of the Lord Jesus: Baptism in the Early Church (Studies of the New Testament and its World; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997), 149-50.
27. Matt 7:13.
28. So Hans D, Betz, "A Jewish-Christian Cultic Didache in Matt 6:1-18: Reflections and Questions on the Problem of the Historical Jesus," in H. D. Betz, Essays on the Sermon on the Mount (trans. L. Welborn; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 55-69.
29. So Hans D. Betz, "The Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:3-7:27): Its Literary Genre and Function," in Betz, Essays on the Sermon on the Mount, 1-16.
30. Dibelius, Brief des Jakobus, 19-20.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
sis. There is no evidence that the audience is preparing for baptism, indeed there is evidence that the audience is already baptized, since reference is made to the name that has been invoked upon them (2:7), and to the new birth that they have already received (1:18). The question, therefore, is whether the paraenetic content of James is meant to recall instruction given before baptism as a means of restoring the hearers to their baptismal resolve through reminding them of their initial incorporation into James's group and therefore to reflect paraenesis proper.
This in turn can only be answered through an examination of what James says about baptism, to see whether this gives a clue to the nature of the pre-baptismal direction that had been given. If this direction may be seen to conform to patterns and contents of catechesis known elsewhere, then we may reasonably suggest that elements adduced from elsewhere, in the Traditionskreis may have formed part of that known within the James community. We might then recognize that the persuasive force of James's words comes about through the restatement of baptismal protrepsis.
2. BAPTISM IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND THE DIDACHE
Regarding the rite of baptism itself we are well-informed by the Didache of the practice of this community,?! but rather than tread this ground again we begin with James, in an attempt to recover the understanding of baptism enunciated here, in order to see the extent to which it is shared by the other two documents under discussion.
As already noted, there are two passages that seem to reflect the baptized status of the hearers and that, in turn, may inform us regarding James's thoughts concerning baptism. In addition to these, Braumann argues that 2:5, 14; 4:10,
12; 5:15, and 5:20 are also baptismal references.>2 His arguments are, however, vague; for instance on 5:20 he simply notes that release from death might be a reference to baptism as the language is fitting. However, these are not obviously baptismal in the sense that the first two are. We will argue below that 5:20 at least bears the weight that Braumann puts upon it, albeit on different grounds from 31. Among treatments of baptism in the Didache see, beyond the standard commentaries, Nathan Mitchell, "Baptism in the Didache," in The Didache in Context: Essays on Its Text,
History, and Transmission (ed. C. N. Jefford; NovTSup 77; Leiden: Brill, 1995), 226-55; Willy
Rordorf, "Baptism According to the Didache," in The Didache in Modern Research (ed. J. A.
Draper; AGJU 37; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 212-22; Jonathan A. Draper, "Ritual Process and Ritual
Symbol in Didache 7-10," VC 54 (2000): 121-58.
32. Georg Braumann, "Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes," TZ 18 (1962):
406-8.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
those that he adduces, once we have submitted the two clear references to closer examination.*3 The first passage relates to the rebirth undergone in baptism, and is part of a statement of the beneficence of God: naéoa dédo1¢ aya8i Kai nav SOpnpa téetov dvwhév got Katabaivov and Tod Natpds TOV PwTwY, Tap' @ OdK Evi napadhayl i tponijs anooKiaopa. BovAnOeic anekbnoev Hpac Adyw aAnGeiac eic
TO elvat Has anapyrv Tiva THV adtod KTIOpLatwv.*4 The baptismal reference is clear in the reference to the birthing of the Christian. The birthing is in order to make those so reborn an &napxq) of his creation. The creation is, it would seem, not the old creation, as it is hard to see how those baptized should be first fruits of that, but rather a new creation being ushered in by God, an eschatological refashioning in which those who are baptized are already present, a creation that is God's own. The means of doing so is a Aéyog dAnPeiac, here implying that the word is spoken in the baptismal context, as it is the means by which the birthing takes place.>5 It is, in other words, a perlocutionary act. Whereas it may be a reference to a baptismal formula, an utterance by which the new status of the baptized is brought about, even assuming that such a formula existed, the word that is the means of birth is the word of God whereas the performance of birth in baptism is the work as much of the water as any words that might be uttered, and therefore it is equally likely that it is a reference to the words spoken in paraenesis before the baptism itself, the instruction given, seen as the word of truth.*¢ It is also conceivable that, just as in the practice of proselyte baptism within Judaism, voice was given to the greater and lesser commandments even while the candidate was in the water,>7 so directions and Commandments were repeated during the baptism itself.38 Leaving the question of the word for the moment,
33. Braumann's approach may be contrasted to that of Garleff, Urchristliche Identitat in Matthdusevangelium, for whom ritual as an identity former is all but absent in James (note especially pp. 316 and 325.) 34. Jas 1:17-18.
35. See also the similar uses and context of the term at Col 1:5 and Eph 1:13. The context in Ephesians is clearly baptismal, that in Colossians is related closely to conversion. See, however, Martin, James, 40, for whom the word of God spoken in creation provides the sole background to the term.
36. So Franz Mussner, "Die Tauflehre des Jakobusbriefs," in Zeichen des Glaubens: Studien zu Taufe und Firmung (ed. H. Auf Der Maur and B. Kleinheyer; Freiburg: Herder, 1972),
63-64, who also notes the parallel with Eph 1:13. For other understandings of the term, such as reference to the Torah or to the word spoken in creation, with some discussion, see Wiard
Popkes, "Tradition und Traditionsbriiche im Jakobsbrief," in The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition (ed. J. Schlosser; BETL 176; Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 153; Garleff, Urchristliche Identitat in Matthdusevangelium, 276, n. 318 with refs.
37. b. Yebam. 47a-b.
38. We may note in this context the somewhat speculative but nonetheless attractive suggestion of Aaron Milavec, The Didache: Faith Hope and Life of the Earliest Christian Com-
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
however, we may state at this stage that baptism in James's understanding is a means by which the believer enters a new eschatological status, standing as the beginning of a new creation.
An eschatological element in Matthew's understanding of baptism is identified by Hartman within the first Gospel in that the Lord's instruction to baptize is set in the expectation of his coming again, and in the promise that the Lord will be with the believer to the end of the age.59 Presence with the Lord is also understood by Nepper-Christensen as central to Matthew's understanding of baptism,*° thus indicating an inaugurated eschatology by which the presence of the Lord is an earnest of the coming of the Son of Man. The Didache likewise sounds a note by which we may understand baptism as having a clear inaugurated eschatological orientation. In particular we may note that it is through baptism that persons are admitted to the eucharistic meal in which the eschatological presence of the Lord was enjoyed, even while his coming was besought.*!
The conclusion, moreover, exhorts the hearer in the light of the Lord's coming to continue in the state in which they were baptized. But for all that a similarity is arguable, there is not sufficient proximity in baptismal theologies here, nor is this similarity unique, for Pauline circles likewise see the Christian standing as part of a new creation.*2 We may turn to the other clearly identified reference to baptism within James. In the context of a discussion concerning courts, reference is made to the name that has been called over the Christian. Of the rich who are dragging the hearers into the courts, James states: obk abtoi BAaognpotoatv TO kadov Svopa
TO émikAnOév éq' budc.4> We may note that the same phrase is found in Herm.
Sim. 8.6.4 where the shepherd refers to apostates who have become ashamed of 16 dvopa Kupiov Td émtkAnPév én' abtovcs.#4 In some sense the name is called out over a person, though Hartman doubts this, and suggests instead that the usage reflects the Hebrew Bible and that so "the expression hardly refers directly to baptism, but rather says that the Christians addressed are sanctified and dedicated to God and so belong to him, like the old Israel." 4° The aorist, however, munities, 50-70 CE (New York: Newman, 2003), 266-68, that the Two Ways catechism was repeated during the baptism.
39. Hartman, Into the Name of the Lord Jesus, 153.
40. Poul Nepper-Christensen, "Die Taufe im Matthausevangelium," NTS 31 (1985): 206rf
41. For a general recognition of the Didache's understanding of baptism as eschatological see Mitchell, "Baptism in the Didache," 248, though the significance he attaches to the term
"eschatology" is not altogether clear.
42. E.g., 2 Cor 5:17.
43. Jas 2:7.
44. See also Herm. Sim. 9.17.4.
45. Hartman, Into the Name of the Lord Jesus, 49, n. 52.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
indicates a liturgical event*® rather than a standing situation, which would more naturally be expressed by a perfect. The name is called out onto the Christian.
The name is either that of Jesus or, as implied in the baptismal rite of the Didache and in Matthew's directions for the baptism of the nations, that of the Trinity. My own suspicion is that the name is the name of Jesus.
Although it is possible that this is a reference to baptism émi t@ dvopatt 'Inood Xpiotod, and that it reflects a formula baptizing in the name of Jesus, 47 and that the same is true of the baptismal rites of Acts, there are grounds to doubt this. For whereas there are several references in Acts to baptism into the name of Jesus Christ48 these do not allow us confidently to assert that this is the formula employed. Rather, as Hartman puts it, "in all probability the rite was accompanied with such interpreting prayers or allocutions or proclamations that it was clear to those who took part and those who assisted that it was naturally called a baptism into the name of the Lord Jesus."49 Von Campenhausen similarly points out that everything in the church might be done "in the name of Jesus," and that therefore no special significance should be attached to baptism in this name.>?
Hartman and von Campenhausen thus give more than adequate explanations of the usage that therefore do not necessitate the assumption that the formula is employed in the ritual, and so it is all the more odd that Hartman, though not von Campenhausen, nonetheless assumes that the baptismal rite named Jesus in some way.
The model of proselyte baptism as of the other purification rites in water known in Judaism does not presume the use of-a formula,>! and in the earliest period, the early-third century, in which we are well informed concerning baptismal rituals, there is no formula spoken by the baptizer but rather a set of interrogations to which the candidate answers. These later interrogations are
46. So, also, Peter Davids, The Epistle of James: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC;
Exeter: Paternoster, 1982), 113, who otherwise does not concentrate on the liturgical significance of this statement or on baptismal allusions in the letter, as witnessed by his comment (p.
90) that reference to catechesis in the Aéyog dAnBeiag is "possible."
47. So Mussner, "Die Tauflehre des Jakobusbriefs," 62.
48. E.g., Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5.
49. Hartman, Into the Name of the Lord Jesus, 140.
50. Hans F. von Campenhausen "Taufen in dem Namen Jesu?" VC 25 (1971): 3. Similar arguments were employed by Edward G. C. F. Atchley, On the Epiclesis of the Baptismal Liturgy and in the Consecration of the Font (London: Humphrey Milford, 1935), 7-8.
51. So, pertinently, Von Campenhausen, "Taufen in dem Namen," 7, though we should note b, Yebam. 47a-b as cited above, and, again as noted above, the suggestion of Milavec, who likewise rightly rejects the existence of any formula spoken by the baptizer. Von Campenhausen's argument at "Taufen in dem Namen," 6, that there is no formula found in the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch at Acts 8 is on its own a weak argument from silence, but is strengthened by reference to silent rites elsewhere.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
Trinitarian in form. We may thus note that just as the formula "baptism in the name of Jesus" need not reflect liturgical use, the same is true of the Trinitarian formula in Matthew and the Didache.°2 The point that bedevils this discussion is the unspoken assumption that there was a formula spoken by the baptizer, and yet there is no evidence for any such formula from the first four centuries but rather an interrogation which, in the third century at least, is threefold. The Didache does not state that the Trinity should be named in the baptismal process, and so we should anticipate that baptism, in accordance with the models of purification known in Judaism, should be silent. Hartman suggests that the Trinitarian formulation comes about having grown from an original naming of Jesus as there is reflection in debate with Jews on the fact that Jesus is the Father's
Son and that the Spirit is active in his mission;>> however, whereas this is a plausible process of theological reflection there is no necessity that this be ritually expressed, but rather implies an expansion of the idea of baptism into the name and power of God.
It is possible, however, to countenance some development of understanding even within the period during which the Didache was redacted, from talk of baptism into the Lord's name to talk of baptism into that of the Trinity. Yet that is not to say that there was a change in the baptismal formula, for there was no formula as such, but might rather be expressed in the number of immersions.
So it is possible that the redactor of Did. 7:3, in stating that that infusion, when practiced, should take place three times in the name of the Trinity, is adding something new in that there may have been a change from a single immersion on the basis of an expression of faith in Jesus to a triple immersion on the basis of an expression of faith in the triad. Certainly as the baptism of Gentiles becomes more common an expression of faith in God the Father, which might be assumed to have been held by those of Israelite heritage, would be a reasonable addition.*4
This is slightly speculative, as it is based solely on one piece of evidence and on one (reasonable) assumption, but that is more evidence than can be brought for a baptismal formula beyond the possible repetition of elements of the catechism, before Nicaea.
On the assumption that the name to which reference is made is that of Jesus, James and Hermas provide the best evidence for the use of this name in a liturgical formula connected to baptism. Yet even though the name of Jesus is mentioned in the baptismal rite of James's community, there is no certainty that the formula was declaratory in the manner imagined; indeed the terms éruxAndev éq' duds in James and énixhnPév én' adtovs in Hermas sound more
52. See Nepper-Christensen, "Die Taufe im Matthausevangelium," 203, who assumes that this is a liturgical formula, whilst doubting its originality.
53. Hartman, Into the Name of the Lord Jesus, 151.
54. So also Rordorf, "Baptism According to the Didache," 217-28.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
as though the formula to which reference is made might be epicletic. Once this is recognized there is other evidence that falls into place. Thus Cyprian refers to Marcionite belief that the efficacy of baptism comes about through the "maiestas nominis"55 and the anonymous De rebaptismate from the same period likewise appears to indicate that baptism, particularly in Marcionite communities, might include an invocation of Jesus upon the candidate, and in such a way that this would appear to have been a preor post-baptismal ceremony.°® The summit of the evidence, however, is in Traditio apostolica in which, immediately after baptism, the candidate is anointed by a presbyter with the words "I anoint you with holy oil in the name of Jesus Christ."57 We may suggest that the oil has become the medium of the calling down of the name upon the candidate.>® That all this evidence is Roman and/or Marcionite should not deter us, as these Roman rites reflect practice imported from the eastern Empire and Marcionite liturgical practice is not distinct from that of the Grofkirche.>?
This formula, therefore, should be understood separately from references in Acts to baptism "in the name of Jesus," or the direction of the Didache that those baptized "in the name of the Lord" are those with the exclusive rite to participate in the Lord's Supper. The name is the name of Jesus, but it is spoken not as a declaratory baptismal formula but as part of an epicletic preor postbaptismal ceremony.
If it is the case that baptism in the community of James included an epiclesis of the Lord onto the candidate as part of the complex of baptismal rites, then there is a distinct difference between this ritual and that of the Didache. With regard to Matthew we are less certain, as the Lord's promise to be with the disciples may reflect such an epiclesis. This is, of course, conjectural in the extreme, but we cannot, from the information available to us, totally exclude the possibility that there was such a rite.
55. Ep. 74.5.1.
56, Atchley, On the Epiclesis, 7 and 16, n, 44, suggests that this is simply a prayer, an invocatio. Whereas this is just feasible in De rebaptismate 10, which speaks vaguely of the invocatio of the name, in 12 the invocatio is specifically super the candidates. "Si sic perseuerunt," (i.e., should heretics who have been baptized but have not received the Holy Spirit through the imposition of a bishop's hands continue not to receive episcopal handlaying) "salui esse non possunt, quia non requisiuerunt Dominum post inuocationem nominis eius super eos."
57. This congruence of Trad. ap. with other Roman evidence tends to support my suggestion in On the Apostolic Tradition (Crestwood, N.Y.: St Vladimir's, 2001), 122, that this section is part of an underlying Roman rite. See Paul F. Bradshaw et al., The Apostolic Tradition: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002), 127.
58. Slightly more speculatively we may suggest that this practice in turn led to the epicletic prayers in Syrian rites over the oil for the rusma.
59. So my "Bread, Fish, Water and Wine: the Marcionite Menu and the Maintenance of Purity," in Marcion und seine kirchengeschichtliche Wirkung (ed. G. May and K. Greschat; TU
150; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002), 207-20.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
Beyond these two references within James we cannot safely go. We are also not in a position to argue from silence. That is to say, whereas Matthew's account of the baptizer's activity implies, on the basis of comparison with the other synoptic accounts, that forgiveness was not part of the complex of ideas surrounding baptism,°° and whereas the Didache seems likewise not to promote such an idea,°! its absence from James may simply be the result of an absence of opportunity rather than the absence of an idea.®2
Thus on the basis of these two phrases we deduce that the rite described by James has the significant difference from that of the Didache in that there is an invocation of the name of Jesus; it is possible that Matthew's rite had this but we are far from sure of this. Secondly we note that although for all three baptism is the means by which the believer enters the eschatological realm this is not a mark of uniqueness.
3. JAMEs'S EXHORTATION AS REFLECTING BAPTISMAL PARAENESIS
In spite of the fundamentally negative result, it is still worth exploring whether the sections in which James's baptismal allusions occur bear traces of pre-baptismal instruction, in particular insofar as the reference to rebirth makes explicit reference to such instruction. There are other grounds for attempting this undertaking, moreover, as, although we may concentrate on three particular documents that share a Traditionskreis, to a degree there are others that likewise in some way appear to reflect a common catechetical pattern. This pattern was identified by Carrington within the Pauline tradition,® and although the pattern itself is not found within the three documents under scrutiny, elements of its contents certainly appear that imply the circulation of material related to baptism quite independent of the differing rites by which baptism was administered.
Popkes had indeed argued that there was a debt within James to prebaptismal direction. This conclusion was reached in part on the basis of a characterization of the letter as having an Anredecharakter, and on the ground of a thematic cohesion with 1 Peter, arguably also redacted from pre-baptismal instruction, in particular with regard to the theme of testing. He further observes that testing is also part of rabbinic instruction given to proselytes at baptism, that there is also allusion to testing in a baptismal context at 1 Cor 10, and that the baptism of Jesus is closely tied to his subsequent testing in the wilderness. This
60. Hartman, Into the Name of the Lord Jesus, 152; Nepper-Christensen, "Die Taufe im
Matthausevangelium," 201.
61. So Mitchell, "Baptism in the Didache," 234-35.
62. Though we should note that forgiveness is attributed to prayer with anointing at 5:15.
63. Philip Carrington, The Primitive Christian Catechism: A Study in the Epistles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940).
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
thematic congruence and quasi-homiletic character are the bases on which the possibility is raised that James reflects catechetical paraenesis.°4 When I examined James to determine whether it might reflect a synagogue homily or other proclamation of the word within the Christian assembly I found these arguments unconvincing,® and still do. There is no particular reflection of a liminal character in James's hearers and although testing fits with the character of somebody approaching baptism and is linked in the tradition with baptism, this life-setting for testing is not unique as other situations might call forth such a trial of faith.
Nonetheless, Popkes's conclusion that James in some way reflects pre-baptismal instruction may well be correct, though it may be reached on different grounds, namely, a degree of cohesion between some of the content and material, which may be agreed on safer grounds to have been addressed to an audience approaching baptism. Once this is seen, then the thematic cohesion that Popkes observed is better established as having derived from a baptismal context and his suggestions then begin to have some force. Perdue also suggests that there is a reflection of pre-baptismal instruction: "In fact, chapter 4 recalls the language that was a part of the initial rite of passage into the community; 'submission',
'cleansing of hands', 'purifying of the heart', 'mourning', and 'humiliation.'
More precision than this, however, is needed, as Perdue himself recognizes,®7 and this is what the comparative study may supply.
We begin with the reference to dnoxvnotg by means of the word. In the exhortation that follows, to be clean and to act upon the word that is being heard, we may suggest that there is continued reference to the baptismal catechesis, principally in the exhortation to put off all dirt (1:21), and in that light to see the Euputocs Adyog to which reference is made as the same Adyog by which the hearers had been reborn.®8 Separating this apparently baptismal exhortation and the reference to rebirth is an exhortation to avoid anger (1:19d-20), which is certainly part of the Two Ways tradition, as well as being linked to the extension of the scope of the Decalogue at Matt 5:21-23, and on those grounds it may be said to have been part of the catechesis.®? Such a pattern is, moreover observable else64. Wiard Popkes, Adressaten, Situation und Form des Jakobusbriefes (SBS 125/126; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1986), 125-56.
65. Alistair Stewart-Sykes, From Prophecy to Preaching: A Search for the Origins of the Christian Homily (VCSup 59; Leiden: Brill, 2001), 157. Very brief attention was given to the topic as it was incidental to the main line of the argument. Nonetheless, this is one of many parts of the book which I may wish had been better written.
66. Perdue, "Paraenesis and the Epistle of James," 251.
67. Ibid., 256.
68. So also, though on different grounds and with a less precise view of the M6yog aAnBetac,
Garleff, Urchristliche Identitdt in Matthdusevangelium, 277.
69. Wiard Popkes, Der Brief des Jakobus (THKNT 14; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2001), 129, arguing that the material concerning anger is part of an extension of the
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
where. Thus 1 Pet 1:23-2:1 begins with a reminder of the rebirth of a Christian 514 Adyou C@vto¢ Beod Kai pévovtoc and then exhorts the hearers to abandon malice, deceit, and other sins of this nature. Less immediately comparable is Col
3:8-10 in that the exhortation to lay aside anger and falsehood is not preceded but followed by a reminder of the renewal that the hearers had experienced, but the pattern nonetheless appears to be present. Finally, Eph 4:20-26 reminds the hearers of their initial catechism, and on that basis calls for the renewal of the hearers and the abandonment of falsehood and anger. James is thus reminding his hearers not only of their baptism but of the instruction received in that context.
Then looking back from the statement of the baptized status of the believer born through the word of truth we may note the significance of the statement that the Lord is "Father of lights in whom no darkness is found." Due to its context, we may suggest that this is a reference to a version of the Two Ways in which the ways are characterized as light and darkness. Moreover, it is in the light of a possible debt to the Two Ways tradition that we may accept the suggestion, advanced by Braumann, but not actually argued, that the reference to one who turns a sinner away from the mAdvn 650¢ at 5:20 is indeed a reference to pre-baptismal direction. Again, such language is not unique to James and the Didache, but is surely part of a wider and fundamental discourse of conversion, as part of which we may observe Acts 26:18, 1 Thess 5:4—-5, and Eph 5:8.7° Thus the content of this section in James may be said to have derived from a reminder of baptismal instruction.
Once the possibility of cohesion between the contents of baptismal paraenesis known from elsewhere and the contents of James is raised, the parallels between James and the Two Ways section of the Didache, as to Matt 5-7, begin to appear more readily. There is little point in enumerating them, but I note a few simply to illustrate the point. There are, for instance, the warning about the manner in which ém6vpia leads on to sin, which in turn leads to death;7! the re-enforcement and extension of the command to love one's neighbor;'* the demand for perfection and completeness in the observance of the law;73 and the warning against double-mindedness.74 We cannot be sure whether material beyond that which is directly paralleled elsewhere may have derived from the catechetical tradition, and may also note the likelihood that the material has material from Matt 5 suggests that the reference to the dixatoobvn of God is also part of the catechetical package.
70. See Edward G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Saint Peter (London: Macmillan, 1946),
375-84, and the table of parallels that he presents.
71. Jas 1:15; cf. Matt 5:28; Did. 3:3.
72. Jas 2:8; cf. Matt 5:43-44; Did. 1:2.
73. Jas 2:10-11; cf. Matt 5:48 and Did. 6:2.
74. Jas 1:8; cf. Did. 2:4; 4:4.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
received a fairly free treatment. Hence it is possible that 4:7—4:10 reflects a Haustafel of submission. Thus here one of Braumann's suggestions is shown to have some possible basis, albeit on grounds different from those that he adduced.
Thus, having seen that parts at least of Matt 5-7 and parts at least of James reflect pre-baptismal paraenesis, cohesion of other parts of their contents with Two Ways material in the Didache, which is known to function specifically (that is to say catechetically) paraenetically, indicates that some elements within James that are superficially paraenetic in the general sense, are specifically so, even if they are not framed in the context of baptismal language or explicitly linked with baptism in any way. Thus, in the light of a pre-baptismal understanding of much of James's direction, the extent to which the weight of the parallels between Matthew and James noted by Martin occur in Matt 5-7 is striking.75
Although this material is catechetically expressed, it is possible that it was not catechetically formed but that its genesis lay in early Judaism, not in the formation of proselytes but in the formation of disciples within inner-Jewish groups. It is thus noteworthy that the correlations between desire, sin, and death of Jas 1:14-15 and 1:19-21 is, as Huub van de Sandt notes in his essay within this collection, closely paralleled in ethos and content not only by the Matthaean antitheses and Did. 3:1-6 (the teknon section) but also within rabbinic literature.'6 Yet, just as the teknon section is secondarily included in the Two Ways found within the Didache (being absent in the version found within Barnabas) and so brought into catechetical use, so this material is already in catechetical use within the community of James. Thus Jas 1:14-15 and 1:19-21 form a frame around the exhortation not to be deceived and the reminder of the hearers' birth by the word of truth, and the whole section is concluded by an exhortation to put off all filth, a section redolent with baptismal language. Because of the catechetical framework in which the material is now found, we may suggest that these parallels denote more than a common thought-world but that the formation of those being baptized has contributed to the preservation and transmission of this material within forming Christian communities and that the communities represented by these documents had a common catechetical tradition that had incorporated material originally intended to form disciples from within Judaism,
With this in mind we may return to the theme of testing discerned by Popkes and employed by him as a rationale for seeing catechetical elements within James. Whereas we have suggested that this is of itself insufficient reason to understand James as paraenetic, other grounds for doing so have been found.
So in pursuing a paraenetic basis for some of the material regarding testing we 75. Martin, James, Ixxv-lxxvi. Popkes, Adressaten, Situation und Form, 156-76 gives a much more detailed comparison of material across the three documents.
76. See the contribution of Huub van de Sandt in this volume.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
Sor may, for instance, observe the makarism at 1:12, which Popkes observes fits closely with the makarisms of Matthew's paraenesis"7 and, on the basis of the setting of the parallel within Matthew, assign this to baptismal paraenesis. Beyond this, however, we should also note the hypothesis of Selwyn, developed from that of Carrington, that persecution and testing had called forth a "persecution catechism." Elements such as exhortations to stand firm and to be watchful had been linked by Carrington to his catechetical pattern,"8 but Selwyn had argued that these were developed later as a standard response to persecution;79 Jas 1:2-3,
12; 4:7 and 5:8 are numbered by him among traces of this catechism. Davies' response that the Q material speaks of crisis, and thus hardly reflects regular catechism, is slightly relevant,®° in that the formulation of a stock response is hardly a response to persecution. But Davies fails to recognize the personal crisis that is represented by the state of the catechumen turning from one way of life to another, such that material formed for catechetical purposes might well serve to strengthen a Christian faced with persecution.
We may not perceive persecution as such behind James, but there certainly is Teipaopoc. It is this same "persecution catechism," observed by Selwyn, that is the basis on which Popkes observes such language as emerging from pre-baptismal direction, though rightly, with Carrington (who does not take account of James in his work) he counts it as part of a more general catechesis rather than a catechesis formed in time of trial. If then we were to ask why this familiar material is being repeated to those already baptized we may point to the metpaopdc.
Having been converted and reformed through the word, the word is repeated to those in danger of reverting under testing. The persuasive force of James, therefore, derives in part from reminding the baptized hearers of the Adyoc aAnBeiac of perlocutionary force, which was delivered to them at baptism. Testing and trial provide an occasion to repeat the Adyog aAnGelac, of which traces occur throughout the document, so that it might have the same effect that it had had before.®! It may, moreover, be significant that the epistle concludes with a mention of those who turn sinners from the path of death as here the technique of repeating the catechetical word is commended, so reflecting back on the preceding material.
It is, however, to be noted that some of these catechetical materials are found in materials beyond the three documents under consideration here, and beyond
77. Popkes, Adressaten, Situation und Form, 135-36.
78. Carrington, Primitive Christian Catechism, 39 and passim.
79. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Saint Peter, 439-58.
80. William D. Davies, The Sermon on the Mount (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966), 106-7.
81. Similarly Mussner, "Die Tauflehre des Jakobusbriefs," 66: "der Brief (ist) eine Aktualisierung des in der Taufe 'eingepflanzten Wortes' fiir die konkreten Gemeindeprobleme, mit denen sich Jakobus konfrontiert sieht."
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
documents that are conventionally termed "Jewish Christian."8? In the case of the Didache matters are complicated as some of the parallels, particularly those with proximity to Matthew such as the demand for perfection and the material within the so-called sectio evangelica of Did. 1, may, by comparison to Doctrina apostolorum, be observed to be the work of the redactor rather than material found within a source, indicating that this redactor is closer to pharisaic circles than the writer who originated the two ways as found within the Didache. Thus although the recognition of catechetical material is notable and casts light on James's purpose and the persuasive strategy employed, it would be a mistake to employ the presence of this common material as evidence of a close relationship between the communities to which these documents are addressed. The value of this comparative study lies in the ability to place some material within a catechetical framework with far greater certainty through observing the catechetical setting of the Two Ways paraenesis but the construction of a closed relationship between the communities using these documents can only be sustained on the basis of material that is not only shared by all three but that is also unique to them. The catechetical tradition is more widespread.
That the Sitz im Leben for the generation of so much material may have been pre-baptismal direction should not surprise us given the central role of this activity in the emerging Christian communities. For the classical form-critics, preaching explained both the form and the preservation of a great deal of material, but, whereas missionary preaching may have occurred, our view is distorted largely by the picture of the Stoic or cynic preacher constructed by WilamowitzMoellendorff.83 A more realistic picture is providéd by Hock, who sees protreptic and paraenesis alike delivered on an individual and informal basis.84 The other possible meaning of the term, preaching within the assembly, did not exist in the form in which we might recognize it, though a functionally equivalent activity occurred through the activity of the prophets.
In a concluding note, we may observe, as a final point of contact between the three documents, the emphasis that each puts on the role of the teacher.85
Thus James warns against the dangers implicit in too ready a desire to adopt the role,86 even as the Didache desires that teachers be supported,87 and while Mat82. A characterization employed for the three particularly by Garleff, Urchristliche Identitdit in Matthdusevangelium, passim but esp. nn. 207-14.
83. Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Antigonos von Karystos (Philologische Untersuchungen 4; Berlin: Weidmann, 1881), appendix on Teles: 292-319.
84. Ronald F. Hock, "The Workshop as a Social Setting for Paul's Missionary Preaching,"
CBQ 14 (1979): 439-50.
85. So Martin, James, Ixxiv.
86. Jas 3:1 and much of what follows.
87. Did. 4:1; note also the direction of 15:1 that the overseers and deacons are to give financial support to the teachers alongside the prophets.
PARAENESIS AND BAPTISM
Soo thew encourages honor to be shown to the true teacher.88 We may, moreover, note the extent to which James in particular exhibits the style of the works identified as diatribal.8° Whereas the diatribé is a subgenre of even more dubious identity than paraenesis, as a style we may nonetheless accept that it is a mark of the schoolroom." Since we may envisage that the delivery of paraenesis was fundamentally a role of the teacher, in each case we may see the paraenetic role of pre-baptismal preparation leading to the creation of a circle of influence among the baptized; this in turn could be the background to the discussion of teaching that causes envy and strife at Jas 3:14-16. The significance of this, however, is the subject of another paper.
AUTHOR's NOTE
Wiard Popkes died in January of 2007. He had intended to give a paper at the conference and this paper was given in the stead of his. I had been looking forward to discussing these issues with him. This paper is offered as a tribute to an exemplary scholar.
88. Matt 13:52.
89. Thus James H. Ropes, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the the Epistle of James
(ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1916), 17: "The epistle is a diatribe." See also Stewart-Sykes, From Prophecy to Preaching 154-55.
90. So, in particular, Thomas Schmeller, Paulus und die Diatribe: eine vergleichende Stilinterpretation (NTAbh NF 19; Minster: Aschendorff, 1987).
wn i » ha a : ee '
: i. heat tay
saan garitll| ox"
; » i ice otra mene < = gt capes rssh ih iliasdihenateae aca ns ote ay ae iiyreaes smashes.
: te tias = wit aera are repes oodh =@ ay m q ~ Bag eRe ee lk a ; " a " iS Aste 0% ' — gomhtee a memes cer q 7 2 ee ' iy) ' i he é ay; ean eed ~ roveroluhentun iid hy © eg ert pene ree
; '
<EiyAy G i a mf
ve ore Atgomied, Thy, Ot: & Cina why FeS it eine 4-6 ; "a (wits Cem ro take, VA 9 <n ta oat . a a ifrpha tai 608: * wessalo jal thet cane ace Bags FART! ely THs ) whet eg oes Or epty tom Detewa u medi: a id: 5). wet "s mad 0d bite va peciemands te Weapons » see ye " polio
ae nd at aoe ake 1s Chote. cashew! Do the amet in i? sue Pes De (SU ; techbed \eiay be 7 aco . p Ag vy Wee re ee ty! = '
= root x Entre ory ; one aa : so / 40 rns. 2a) al * a os. ug' ot the «an, joyce Ae oe e ee POO gece Ea : ig inten , ~ Rstaaee. lave 'wep gas =, 3 wn angie
dw ud?, we spy eeeen Oe et Ree is oe ey ie i an ea Raa ae ia nt wd i
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF
OATH IN JAMES, MATTHEW, AND THE DIDACHE AND ITS
SIGNIFICANCE FOR CONTEXTUALIZATION
Martin Vahrenhorst The Jewish character of Matthew's Gospel has been noticed from the very beginning of its reception. As early as the second century, Papias considers it to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 39.16), as many scholars have done in his footsteps. Even if we do not share Papias's opinion that the Greek Matthew is a translation of a Semitic original, we may read his éBpaiéi dtaXéxtw as pointing to the "Jewishness" of this work.!
In twentieth-century biblical research, the voices of those who describe Matthew as an author from a Gentile background and unfamiliar with Jewish practice and traditions? have become more and more silent, and Ulrich Luz' monumental commentary has convinced the majority of New Testament scholars that Matthew represents a Jewish-Christian community. According to Luz, Matthew's community has only recently split from Judaism, and the sharp polemic permeating his Gospel represents the community's way of coping with this painful split.
This reconstruction of Matthew's historic and social background has recently been challenged by a number of monographs from different perspectives. One of the questions raised is, What do we mean with "Judaism"? Has there ever been such a thing as a unified or organized Judaism from which Matthew's community could have split or that could have expelled it? Epigraphic, archaeological, and textual evidence all point to the fact that Judaism was by no means mono1. I thank Eric Ottenheijm who read this paper in absentia at the 2007 Tilburg conference.
Peter Tomson, John Kloppenborg, and Jonathan A. Draper offered helpful comments.
See Joseph Kiirzinger, Papias von Hierapolis und die Evangelien des Neuen Testaments
(Eichstatter Materialien 4; Regensburg: Pustet, 1983), 103.
2. See Martin Vahrenhorst, "lhr sollt iiberhaupt nicht schw6ren": Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs (WMANT 95; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2002), 3-5.
3. See Ulrich Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthdus: Mt 1-7 (5th ed.; EKKNT 1/1; Diisseldorf: Benziger Verlag, 2002), 85-100.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
lithic or uniformly organized, neither before the destruction of the Temple nor in the first centuries afterwards. Judaism can best be described as pluralistic and as resembling a kind of battlefield where different groups struggled for the hearts and minds of the Jewish people. The emerging rabbinic movement was part of that struggle, just as were different Jewish groups that confessed Jesus as God's messiah and God's special agent in the salvation history of Israel. As far as Matthew's Gospel is concerned, one should describe it as the work of a Christian
Jewish community rather than a Jewish Christian one. This view, which has been promoted in the 1990s by scholars such as Andrew Overman and Anthony J.
Saldarini4 was well known to the participants of the 2003 Tilburg conference on Matthew and the Didache, where it has been embraced by several scholars.> It has also been adopted by two recently published commentaries on Matthew, one of which assumes that Matthew was written before 70, the other that it was written in the aftermath of the temple's destruction.® One can by now justly speak of a major trend in Matthean studies.
1. THE PRESENCE OF TORAH AND HALAKAH IN THE CONTEXT OF
NEw TESTAMENT WRITINGS
One of the cornerstones in the debate on Matthew's attitude vis a vis Judaism, and his place inside or outside the frame of other Jewish groups, is the role he ascribes to the Torah. Matthew's strict faithfulness to the Torah, which he strongly emphasizes in Matt 5:17-20, is one of the most important arguments of those scholars who consider Matthew to be a Jewish document. In Matthew's
Gospel, as with all groups that may be considered part of the diverse entity today called Judaism, the Torah is acknowledged as the all-pervasive rule that governs the group members' behavior.
To fulfill that goal, the Torah must be taken as more than a textbook that consists of the five books of Moses. The commandments of the written Torah need to be clarified and applied to present day situations. More than that, the Torah has always been held to be more than simply a written document to which commentaries or applications based on scripture have been added. In the opinion
4. See J. Andrew Overman, Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism: The Social World of the Matthean Community (Minneapolis; Fortress, 1990); Anthony J. Saldarini, Matthew's
Christian Jewish Community (CSJH; Chicago, Ca.: Chicago University Press, 1994).
5. See the conference volume Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same
Jewish-Christian Milieu? (ed. H. van de Sandt; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005).
6. John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005); Peter Fiedler, Das Matthdusevangelium (THKNT 1; Stuttgart:
Kohlhammer, 2006).
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH = 363
of many Jews, Torah also encompasses traditions (e.g., halakic" decisions issued by authoritative persons)® that do not appear in the biblical text. Even though these teachings have no direct basis in scripture, they are considered Torah:
[The rules about] release from vows hover in the air and have naught to support them; the rules about the Sabbath, Festal-offerings, and Sacrilege are as mountains hanging by a hair, for [teaching of] Scripture [thereon] is scanty and the rules many; the [rules about] cases [concerning property] and the [Temple-] Service, and the rules about what is clean and unclean and the forbidden degrees, they have that which supports them, and it is they that are the essentials of the Law.? (m. Hag. 1:8) Thus, in order to clarify a given document's attitude towards the Jewish law, one has to study its use of the Pentateuch and the nonbiblical legal traditions.
The last statement, as simple as it sounds, involves a rather complicated question for New Testament research: Which non-biblical legal traditions are relevant for the understanding of the New Testament text that was composed at the end of the first century c.£.? One trend in biblical research is very strict in one respect: Rabbinic traditions are not to be taken into account when studying first-century Jewish law. This view has been expressed very strongly by Jacob
Neusner and many New Testament scholars followed him in the past and still do so.!° If Neusner were right, we would be left with the writings of the so-called intertestamental period, that is, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the works of Philo and Josephus, and the often neglected papyrological evidence.
I personally consider this view too sceptical and simplistic. Documents compiled and edited after the final redaction of a given New Testament book may still contain important evidence that sheds light on the issues that were on the agenda
7. In Jewish as well as biblical studies a broad understanding of the term "halakah" is increasingly accepted. My own use of this term is close to that described by Peter Tomson:
"Nowadays it (the term halakah, M.V.) is used for the legal elements in such Jewish texts as the scrolls, rabbinic literature, or the writings of Philo and Josephus. There is no reason why we should not expect to find halakhah in a Christian text drawing on Jewish sources." (see "The Halakhic Evidence of Didache 8 and Matthew 6 and the Didache Community's Relationship to Judaism," in van de Sandt, ed., Matthew and the Didache, 132.
8. See Johann Maier, Studien zur jiidischen Bibel und ihrer Geschichte (SJ 28; Berlin: de
Gruyter, 2004), 4-11 and 117.
9. Translation from Herbert Danby, The Mishnah: Translated from the Hebrew with Introduction and Brief Explanatory Notes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933), 212. In order to clarify the understanding of the last sentence, the Babylonian Talmud presents a short discussion: "These are and those are not! - Say, therefore, these and those are essentials of the Torah" (b. Hag. 11b). Translation by I. Abrahams, in The Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo'ed
IV (London: Soncino Press, 1938), 58. The Hebrew of the Mishna is clearer than the English translation: ANNA °F IA.
10. See Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 31-37.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
in the first century, even if Jacob Neusner's famous saying, "What we cannot show we do not know," still holds true. But how can we know? In 1983 Philip S.
Alexander has addressed some important methodological questions concerning the use of rabbinic literature in relation to New Testament texts.!! He points to the diversity of the material presented by the different Jewish sources and states:
The conclusion we should draw from this diversity is that the way forward in the study of early Judaism lies in isolating the individual systems and in describing them in their own terms. There is little to be gained at the moment from thinking globally about the teachings of early Judaism. The error of parallelomania is that it extracts elements from different systems and compares them in isolation.
... The elements must be considered within the systems to which they belong and in which they function.!2
Along the lines Alexander has suggested, one could proceed in the following way: In order to learn something about the state of the halakic debate in the first century we have to start with the earliest available sources. We have to find out which questions were asked concerning a given halakic issue and which answers were proposed. Then we have to move on and examine each document or group of documents with the same questions: "What are your issues, what are your interests and which answers are you proposing?" If one addresses the corpus of Tannaitic literature in the same way after having dealt with all sources prior to it, one is able to compare the results gained by examining all the material. This comparison paves the way for reconstructing the course of the halakic debates throughout the centuries around the themes dealt with in the New Testament.
From a phenomenological point of view it helps to create a "map" of problems and solutions with respect to a certain halakic complex. With these data in mind one can examine related halakic passages of any New Testament writing. Do they find a place on this map or do they turn out to address absolutely different questions and pursue different aims? Where exactly are they to be positioned on this map? Do they have allies or opponents in other literary corpora?
One can easily imagine that such a method does not lead to quick results, but Iam convinced that its results are fairly reliable and that it is worthwhile studying and comparing texts in such a way.
2. OATHS AND Vows One of the halakic issues that caused a long and widespread debate in ancient
Judaism in its different facets from biblical times until the Talmudic period is the 11. Philip S. Alexander, "Rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament," ZNW 74 (1983):
237-46.
12. Alexander, "Rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament," 246.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH = 365
complex of oaths and vows. Almost all Jewish sources deal with it and even nonJewish sources reveal a strong interest in it. Thus, it may be promising to focus on this topic in order to find out how Matthew, the Didache or James is concerned with it, and if and how these writings are related to this inner-Jewish debate.
2.1. JEWISH SOURCES
In this paper I can only very briefly sketch the course of the debate on oaths and vows as it is reflected in the different Jewish sources.!3
One very early contribution to our issue is to be found in the Lxx translation of Lev 24:16. The Hebrew text proposes a punishment for cursing the name of God, while the Lxx prohibits pronouncing the name of God in general. By comparing these two versions one can see that the third-century B.c.£. translators of the Pentateuch had a strong interest in protecting God's name from being profaned, a goal that could best be achieved by not using God's name at all. This intention can be traced throughout most of the debates in the following centuries.
Everybody who proposed a definition of an oath in antiquity describes it as an invocation of a deity to testify in a case where no other reliable evidence is available. A good example is Philo who explains in accordance with other Jewish and pagan voices:!4 "Our conception of an oath is an appeal to God as a witness on some disputed matter" (Philo, Sacr. 91).!5
Thus, by swearing an oath, one calls God to act as a witness in a worldly debate. The danger of profanation is self-evident. I quote Philo again:
For I know full well that there are persons who, in profane and impure places where it would not be fitting to mention either a father or mother .
. swear at length and make whole speeches consisting of a string of oaths and thus, by their misuse of the many forms of the divine name.
. . show their impiety. (Decal. 94) How can this impiety be avoided? Philo proposes two ways. The one he clearly prefers is: "To swear not at all is the best course" (Decal. 84), while "to swear truly is only, as people say, a 'second best voyage" (ibid.).
What is there to be done if one cannot avoid opting for the "second-best voyage"? Philo offers a rather detailed set of rules concerning matter, time, and place and the personal disposition of the person who is going to take an oath.
One factor is very important to him (and has been to other Jews before and after 13. For a more detailed analysis see Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 41214.
14. See Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 96-97.
15. Translation of Philo's texts by Francis H. Colson, Philo (10 vols. and 2 suppl. vols; LCL;
Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1929-53).
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
him): One should not pronounce God's name or even mention God in the oath.
One should rather use oath-formulas that do not mention God directly but are linked to him in an indirect way:
And if indeed occasion should force us to swear, the oath should be by a father and mother [...]. For parents are copies and likenesses of the divine power, since they have brought the non-existent into existence (Spec. 2.2).
The use of such formulas has been very popular and has also been the issue of an intense debate that can be traced in Qumran writings, in pseudepigraphic writings (L.A.E. 19) and of course in Tannaitic literature.!6 The Damascus-document states:
He will not swear by the Aleph and the Lamed nor by the Aleph and the Daleth, but by the oath of the youths, by the curses of the covenant. ..
. And if he swears and transgresses, he would profane the name. .
. (CD XV, 1-3)!7
Alternative oath formulas and circumscriptions of the divine name have been one solution to the problem of how God and his name could be saved from profanation. Another solution was to accept vow-formulas instead of oaths. Vows are a different form of binding speech, but they are not directly related to God. This solution is already proposed by Philo (Spec. 2.12) and it is also known to Josephus
(Ant. 6.24 and Ag. Ap. 1.167). The rabbis rule:
A widow may not receive the payment (of her Ketubah) from the property of the orphans unless she swears (to her claim) on oath. But when they refrained from making her swear on oath, Rabban Gamliel the Elder ordained that she would vow to the orphans... and receive her Ketubah (m. Git. 4:3).
The replacement of oaths by vows had the consequence that some people used circumscriptions for vow formulas as well, which forced the rabbis to discuss which formula is a valid one and which is not. These discussions are collected in the tractate Nedarim. I quote one example: "If a man says to his fellow, Konam or Konah or Konas, these are substitutes for Korban" (m, Ned. 1:2). Comparable
16. Not every formula can be used in an oath, As we have seen, God must by definition be involved. So a valid oath formula must at least in some way be related to God. Philo defines this relationship in platonic terms: Parents are in some way images of God, thus referring to them in an oath makes the oath valid.
17. Translation by Florentino Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English (Leiden: Brill, 1994): 39. "Aleph Lamed" represent an abbreviation of the word "El" (= God) while "Aleph Dalet" stands for the circumscription of God's name (=
Adonai). The concern of the Damascus document is clear: the profanation of God and his name shall be avoided by all means. For this reason alternative oath formulas are proposed.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH
circumscriptions in discussion were "the altar," "the Temple" or "Jerusalem," terms that were also known to Matthew as we will see below. The obvious general tendency in Tannaitic sources was to avoid oaths and vows wherever possible:
"honest people do not vow,"!8 and people who refrain from swearing are most praiseworthy (t. Sotah 7:4).!9
To summarize this brief survey: All Jewish voices participating in the discussion of oaths and vows shared the interest to protect God and his name from being profaned. Different means to achieve this aim were proposed: a) the avoidance of any oath; b) the use of circumscriptions; c) the replacement of oaths by vows.
2.2. MATTHEW
In Matthew's Gospel the material concerning oaths and vows is quite rich in both halakic and haggadic respects. Here, we find two contributions to the Jewish debate about the question how the name of God can be protected from being profaned in the process of swearing, and whether this can be done by using special oath formulas or by replacing oaths by vows (Matt 5:33-7 and 23:16-22). In addition, we have the episode of Peter denying his relation to Jesus by swearing a false oath (26:74).
The halakic material appears in two contexts that are of fundamental importance for the understanding of Matthew's view on the validity of the Torah and the community's competition with the emerging rabbinic movement. Almost no other halakic question is treated with the same intensity. a) Matt 5:33-37 is one of the inaccurately named "antitheses" (Matt 5:21-48).
Each unit begins with a quotation from the Torah, not simply in its written form but in the form in which it was interpreted. These quotations are followed by a statement of Jesus in which he does not simply reject the quotations, but points out their true intention / meaning."° If read in this way, the so-called "antitheses" turn out to be in perfect harmony with Matthew's introductory statement about 18. See Chanoch Albeck, The Mishna. Seder Nashim (Tel Aviv: Debir, 1988), 147 on m.
Ned. 1:1 (DIWD 7733).
19. Another means to restrict swearing oaths was the introduction of the "vain oath" ny1awK pxiw, which was regarded equal to a false oath. Practically, it was almost impossible to know whether an oath that seemed to be necessary was really not to be avoided, and thus a vain oath.
See Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 157-62 and 164-67.
20. The logical antithesis to "You shall not kill" would be "You shall kill," that to "You shall not commit adultery" would be "You shall commit adultery" and so on. Klaus Haacker proposed to call these units "Kommentarworte." See his "Feindesliebe kontra Nachstenliebe?
Bemerkungen zu einer verbreiteten Gegeniiberstellung von Christentum und Judentum" in Dieses Volk schuf ich, das es meinen Ruhm verkiinde (ed. F. Matheus; Schriftenreihe des Forschungsschwerpunktes Geschichte und Religion de Judentums 1; Duisburg: GEJD, 1992), 47-51.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
the ongoing validity of the Torah (Matt 5:17-20). Jesus has not come to reject it, let alone abolish it, but to fulfill it. Each subsequent unit demonstrates how Jesus actually fulfills the Torah by teaching it in its true intention.?!
The commandment "You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord" (Matt 5:33-37) intends to protect God and his name from being profaned,2? which is exactly what happens if one swears a false oath or does not fulfill the vows he or she has made. Jesus is very clear about how this goal can be achieved: One should not swear at all. From the brief sketch above we have seen that Matthew's Jesus was not the first Jew who made such a recommendation and he was not to be the last one either. Compared to Philo or the Tannaitic sources, Matthew appears stricter, but his statement in any case finds its place on the map of the relevant halakic discourse.
Jesus's following argumentation further shows that God's name cannot be protected by the use of circumscriptions. As stated above, such formulae must in a way still be related to God, otherwise they are not valid. Because of this, prerequisite circumscriptions cannot achieve the goal they aim at: No matter how farfetched the link between the circumscription and God may be, God is still involved, as Jesus shows ("it is the throne of God," "it is his footstool," "it is his city").
Verse 36 follows a different logic. According to some sources, an oath is a kind of conditional self curse that comes into effect when the oath proves to be untrue or is broken. When taking the oath, one offers a kind of guaranty that will be lost as soon as the oath is broken or turns out untrue.?? Jesus's line of argument seems to be as follows: One cannot give as a deposit something that one does not own or cannot control, since it is God who rules over a man's head and his aging process. Even such an oath involves God. There is only one consequence if one wishes to fulfill the intention of the commandment quoted at the beginning, namely, to refrain from swearing under any circumstances. Every human utterance must be true in itself.
When compared to the above-mentioned "map" of the halakah of oaths and vows Matthew's Jesus proves to be well versed in the inner logic of the system of circumscriptions. He is also honestly interested in what his "colleagues," whose statements we know from the various Jewish sources between 250 B.c.£. and 200
C.E., are interested in as well, namely, the question, How can God's holy name be
21. For a detailed discussion of the verb mAnpéw in Matt 5:17 see Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 236-43; Matthias Konradt, "Die vollkommene Erfiillung der Tora und der Konflikt mit den Pharisiern im Matthausevangelium" in Das Gesetz im friihen Judentum und im Neuen Testament (ed. D. Sanger and M. Konradt; NTOA / SUNT 57; G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 129-52.
22. This was the intention of all participants in the ancient Jewish discourse on oaths and vows as showed in my brief sketch of the relevant Jewish sources in the preceding section.
23. Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 267-68.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH
saved from profanation? His "solution" turns out to be a serious contribution to a lively Jewish debate. b) One brief glance at Matt 23:16-22 leads to a similar result. The Matthean
Jesus criticizes the representatives of his adversaries for being "blind leaders."
This term is used in inner-rabbinic polemics for denouncing sages who make unfounded halakic decisions.*4 The following verses reflect discussions that can be found in Mishna and Tosefta Nedarim. The halakic question is: "Which formulas are binding, and which are not." The logic Matthew criticizes is: "Every formula that includes something which can be offered to God is a valid equivalent for 'Qorban'. The temple or the altar already belong to God, thus they cannot be offered. These formulas are not binding and do not constitute a valid oath.
Gold and gifts can certainly be offered, so they are equivalent to 'Qorban' and can therefore introduce a binding oath." Matthew's train of thought is very much in line with his argumentation in Matt 5:33-37. Every formula, no matter whether it includes something that can be offered to God or something that already belongs to God, is related to God because he dwells above the altar that sanctifies the gift.
The same holds true for circumscriptions like "heaven" or "temple," as God dwells in the temple and the heavens are his throne.
Again, Matthew knows what he is talking about and he contributes to the halakic discourse that I have described above. As all the formulas that are discussed are related to God, they cannot be used in order to protect God's sanctity.
Swearing and protecting God's sanctity exclude each other, therefore the consequence must be, "Do not swear at all!"
One has to keep in mind that Matthew's Gospel is not a halakic treatise.?° It is a gospel whose main aim is to preach Jesus and to assure the community on its way in following him. On the other hand, one of the most specific character traits of Matthew's account of the Jesus story is that it introduces Jesus as the one and only true teacher.6 A significant portion of his teachings show a clearly halakic nature. The first audience of this teaching is the people of Israel?" and later Gentiles are also included. The halakic orientation of Matthew's teaching
24. See Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 354-57.
25. Still, Matthew can be described as a "manual for discipleship" (see Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, 20).
26. See Martin Karrer, Jesus Christus im Neuen Testament (GNT 11; Géttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), 230; Hans-Jiirgen Becker, Auf der Kathedra des Mose: Rabbinisch-theologisches Denken und antirabbinische Polemik in Matthdus 23,1-12 (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zeitgeschichte 4; Berlin: Institut Kirche und Judentum,
1990), 203-4.
27. This can be shown by evaluating the frame of the Sermon. The audience of the Sermon on the Mount does not only include Jesus's disciples (i.e., Matthew's community). Matthew 5:1 and 7:28 explicitly mention the 5x)ot that represent the people of Israel. See Peter Wick, "Volkspredigt contra Gemeinderegel? Matthaus 5-7 im Vergleich zu Matthaus 18," Kirche und Israel
13 (1998): 138-53; Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, 191-92.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
can be shown by studying Matthew's decision on oaths and vows. It can also be demonstrated by comparing his teaching on the Sabbath (Matt 12), the purity of hands (Matt 15), and legitimate reasons for divorce (Matt 19) with their Marcan parallels. In each case Matthew appears to be up to the state of the halakic debate as it is reflected in Tannaitic sources. Furthermore, Matthew is frequently proposing solutions to halakic problems that are discussed in other Jewish groups as well. His halakic teaching is in perfect harmony with Matt 5:17-20. Each single example shows the Matthean Jesus teaching Torah in a way that it leads to a life that can be described as being in accordance with the justice that exceeds that of Matthew's opponents. It paves a way of living that corresponds to the call EoeoBe ovdv bpeic téXet0t (Matt 5:48). This Torah is part of what Matthew's community is to teach Israel and the Gentiles (Matt 28:19-20).28
What does all this tell us about Matthew's context? First of all, there is nothing in his halakic teaching or in his attitude towards the Torah that would place him outside the framework of competing Jewish groups in the aftermath of the Temple's destruction. The opposite is true: Matthew propagates a Jewish way of life in the footsteps and in the presence of Jesus, the only teacher of Israel who, according to the Gospel's message, really deserves this title (Matt 23:10).?9
2.3. DIDACHE
It is an open question whether the Didache reflects a similar context as Matthew. The recently published volume Matthew and the Didache offers an excellent survey of the state of the debate, in which the opinions, based on more or less the 28. Matt 28:19 has been interpreted as a hint to the fact that Matthew's community does not address Israel anymore. Its mission is limited to the Gentiles (see now Ulrich Luz' more balanced analysis in Das Evangelium nach Matthdus: Mt 26-28 [EKKNT 1/4; Diisseldorf: Benziger,
2002], 447-52). The logic of this view is problematic. At first, Gentiles were explicitly excluded from the mission of the disciples (Matt 10:5, 6). This limitation (not the mission to Israel) is now revoked. It is not said that the Gentiles replace Israel or that the Jewish people are not to be taught anymore (see Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 15-16; Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, 1265-66). The fact that in the Lxx &8vog is commonly used to describe the Gentiles as opposed to \adg, which is reserved for Israel, should not be used as a counterargument. In the Lxx Pentateuch, Israel is called &@vog in Exod 19:6; 33:13; Lev 19:16; 20:3; 21:1; and Deut 4:6; 26:5.
29. The authority that Matthew ascribes to Jesus can in many ways be compared to that which the early rabbis ascribe to themselves. Matthew's insistence on Jesus as the one and only teacher who teaches in the name and authority of the God of Israel (in spite of Matt 23:2-3) and continues to do so through the halakic teaching of the community (Matt 16:19; 18:18) can be considered to be one main reason for the "parting of the ways" between Matthew's community and the emerging rabbinic movement. The latter opted for a "pluralistic" approach to authority and insisted on having more than one teacher. See Shaye J. D. Cohen, "The Significance of Yavneh. Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of Jewish Sectarianism," HUCA 55 (1984): 28-53.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH
same observations, vary from "Jewish group" to "Gentile church."29 In the following pages I will restrict myself to some observations relevant to the Didache's use of and attitude to the Torah.
First of all I have to ask if we can learn anything from the Didache's teaching on oaths and vows. The answer is more or less negative. There is only one saying referring to our subject, Did. 2:2, which prohibits false oaths and counts them among other vices traditionally appearing in Jewish admonitions, such as those against murder, theft, fornication, and so on.3! In the preceding section, the presence of the discussion on oaths and vows was seen as a sign of Matthew's interest in halakic discussions and his place inside the first-century Jewish framework.
Can the Didache's silence on this matter be interpreted as a sign of disinterest and indicate the writing's place outside Judaism? Arguments e silentio are always relatively weak and one single observation can never be decisive.
If one approaches the Didache from the Gospel of Matthew, which was interpreted as a Jewish text above, two observations meet the eye: First, every trace of an inner-Jewish debate is missing (e.g., the antithetical form of Matt
5:38-47 in its reception in Did. 1:3-6).32 Contrary to Matthew, the didachist does not relate himself to competing Jewish opinions or halakot. Does this mean that the didachist has detached himself from the inner-Jewish discourse? Secondly, no reference to the Torah is to be found in the Didache. Contrary to Matthew,
Jesus's teaching, which is authoritative for the Didache (Did. 8:2; 11:2-3),>5 is in no way linked to the Torah. Could this be due to the fact that the Torah is no longer relevant for the author of the Didache? Has its role been taken over by Jesus's and his disciples' teaching?
As is often the case in Didache studies, the same observation is open to opposing interpretations, especially if one tries to interpret it independently from the Gospel of Matthew: The Torah might not have been mentioned explicitly by 30. See above, n. 5. Compare also Marcello Del Verme, Didache and Judaism: Jewish Roots of an Ancient Christian-Jewish Work (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 74-88.
31. This passage converges with ancient Jewish ethical teachings, which are of course all based on Old Testament traditions; see Karl-Wilhelm Niebuhr, Gesetz und Pardnese: Katechismusartige Weisungsreihen in der friihjiidischen Literatur (WUNT 2/28; Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1987), 232-35.
32. The contents of the halakic teachings of the Didache are of course well rooted in Jewish traditions and mirror Jewish debates, but the Didache does not present them as such.
No references to different opinions or discussions can be found. But this observation should not be overestimated as other writings of the Second Temple period, such as the community
Rule of Qumran (1QS), are to a large extent written in a similar fashion.
33. See, e.g., Jens Schréter's contribution in this volume.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
the didachist because he takes its authority for granted and the rules which are expressed in this work are probably considered a part of the Torah itself.34
It is very difficult to decide which interpretation is more plausible. With all necessary caution I suggest approaching a preliminary solution by entering into a short debate about some of the observations that led John Kloppenborg to speak of a "torahizing" of the Didache's ethical teaching.
At first, Kloppenborg compares the existing variants of the "teaching of the Two Ways" (Did. 1:1-6:2) and notices that in the Didache, Lev 19:18, and Deut
6:5 appear in a very prominent position at the beginning of the Didache (Did.
1:2).35
Second, he points to the fact that the Didache's teaching includes more elements of the Decalogue than any parallel tradition.° Even from a linguistic point of view the Didache is closer to the version as it is presented in the Lxx.37 John
Kloppenborg concludes that the Didache "grounds its appeals in the Torah,"38 which implies "that the text is edited and employed in an environment in which the authority of the Torah can be taken for granted."3? Kloppenborg points further to other Jewish documents that operate in a similar way: the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Jesus Sirach, Philo's Hypothetica and Josephus's Against Apion.
But if one takes a closer look at these texts, one major difference becomes immediately apparent: All of them explicitly refer to the Torah, the vouoc, on more than one occasion.4° The Didache, however, never does. All documents
Kloppenborg mentions, even the New Testament traditions (Matt 22:34-40; Rom 13:8-10) refer back to the Torah as the source 'of their ethical teaching.*! The Didache does not. Even where the didachist could have easily done so, namely,
34, Researchers who join this position can point to the Mishna, which does not necessarily quote the written Torah in order to justify its halakic decisions (on this observation see note
40).
35. See John Kloppenborg, "The Transformation of Moral Exhortation in Didache 1-5," in The Didache in Context. Essays on Its Text, History and Transmission (ed. C. N. Jefford;
NovTSup 77; Leiden: Brill, 1995), 98. Kloppenborg remarks that the combination of these two verses is typical of Christian documents.
36. Ibid., 99-100, 37. Ibid., 100.
38. Ibid., 101.
39. Ibid., 102.
40, Even the vast corpus of the Mishna refers to scripture more than 350 times.
41, One possible exemption to this rule is Ps.-Phocylides, which is strongly influenced by Old Testament traditions (see Pieter W. van der Horst's introduction in "Pseudo-Phocylides: A New Translation and Introduction," in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; 2 vols.; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983-85), 2:572) without making this connection explicit. But this can be understood as a part of the unknown author's endeavor to present
Jewish traditions in the attire of Greek wisdom.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH = 373
in Did. 11:2, which strongly resembles Matt 5:17, the object of kataddoat is not the Torah*? but the d5:Saxr, mentioned before. The only authority the didachist explicitly points to is the 5i5ayn, (Did. 2:1), "the commandments of the Lord" (Did. 4:13), the "yoke of the Lord" (Did. 6:2), which equals the "way of the d:5axn" (Did. 6:1), and the only Lord the 5t5ay1 explicitly mentions is
Jesus Christ who has taught his disciples in "his gospel" (another authoritative source!)#3 how to pray (Did. 8:2).
Even though the traditions the Didache makes use of in its present form are undoubtedly taken from a Jewish environment, it is doubtful if the Didache's teaching should really be described as "torahizing." When the Didache, which does not mention the origin of its traditions, is compared to other Jewish texts that do, one might even be tempted to describe the Didache as "de-torahizing" those traditions.
Let me add one last observation to support my point. In 1939/40 Gedalyahu Alon published an important study on the halakah in the Didache. He showed that Did. 13:3, with its teaching on the anapxn,*4 mirrors actual Jewish halakah and custom.*> Other examples can and have been added by various scholars.*6
For our purpose, Did 13:3 in its present form and context is especially interesting. It says that the anap xn is to be given to the community's prophets who are described as the community's high priests (apytepeic). In Jewish sources, the gifts designed as anapxn are intended to be given to the priests and Levites by the common Israelite. This rule is based on the commandments of the Torah and was respected by all Jewish groups we know of.47 The Didache seems to break away from this consensus by establishing a new class of priests, based not on priestly
42. Even though some modern authors put "Torah" in square brackets in order to indicate that it is not found in the source but is added to clarify the Greek text (e.g., Jonathan A. Draper,
"Do the Didache and Matthew Reflect an 'Irrevocable Parting of the Ways' with Judaism?," in van de Sandt, ed., Matthew and the Didache, 219, 226).
43. It seems very likely that the Didache here refers to the Gospel of Matthew.
44. See David E. Aune, "Distinct Lexical Meanings of AIIAPXH in Hellenism, Judaism and Early Christianity," in Early Christianity and Classical Culture (ed. J. T. Fitzgerald et al.;
NovTSup 110; Leiden: Brill 2003), 103-29.
45. Gedalyah Alon, "Ha-halaka ba-Torat ha-Shelihim," Tarbiz 11 (1939-40): 127-45.
Repr.in Studies in Jewish History in the Times of the Second Temple, the Mishna and the Talmud
(ed. G. Alon, 2 vols. 2nd. ed. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1967-70), 1:274-94 (Hebrew)
= "The Halakha in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles," in The Didache in Modern Research
(ed. J. Draper; trans. A. Ben-Meir; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 165-94; Huub van de Sandt and David
Flusser, The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (CRINT
3/5 Assen: Van Gorcum, 2002), 360-64; Del Verme, Didache and Judaism, 189-220.
46. See, e.g., Tomson, "Halakhic Evidence of Didache 8."
47. For the early rabbinic movement see Avraham Aderet, From Destruction to Restauration: The Mode of Yavneh in Re-Establishment of the Jewish People (Jerusalem: Magnes Press,
1990), 367-400 (Hebrew).
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
offspring but on their prophetic gift. Jewish sources of the Second Temple period know of priests, especially the high priest, who possesses the gift of prophecy,48 but never do we hear of a prophet who is considered to be a priest only because he can speak prophetically, as clearly stated by the Didache. This is not just a violation of the Torah, it also indicates that the Didache's community seems to have established a different cult with different priests.
One could object to that interpretation by stating that the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls also had established a diverging cult and yet is still considered part of the Jewish framework. But this community organized itself according to the commandments of the Torah and did not establish a new priesthood.
To conclude, the Didache in its present form formulates ethical principles for a specific group. It prescribes the way in which a given community is to function. It implicitly draws on Jewish traditions without mentioning their origin.
Other than the Gospel of Matthew or the rabbinic writings, Didache does not seem to be interested in defining and proclaiming halakah for Israel. Maybe
Didache's community does not consider itself to be struggling on the battlefield of competing Jewish groups, all teaching how Jews (and in some cases even non-Jews) should live according to the Torah. If I added the word "anymore" to the last sentence, I would also propose a date for the Didache in relation to the Gospel of Matthew. I am reluctant to do so. But if 1 compare those two writings, the Didache seems to be at home in a church that is no longer part of the Jewish framework.4?
My interpretation of Did 13:3 is of crucial importance for understanding Didache as a document that is no longer part of the Jewish framework. In this light, Didache's silence on the Torah, which is in itself open to different interpretations, becomes telling. This is only one argument in an amazingly open discussion, which reminds me of the famous rabbinic saying "if a discussion is led for the sake of heaven, it will endure" (m.Abot 4:11).
48. See Van de Sandt and Flusser, The Didache: Its Jewish Sources, 363.
49. Huub van de Sandt, "Was the Didache Community a Group Within Judaism? An Assessment on the Basis of Its Eucharistic Prayers," in A Holy People; Jewish and Christian
Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity (ed. M. Poorthuis and J. Schwartz ; Jewish and Christian Perspective Series 12; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 85-107 comes to a similar conclusion by evaluating the Didache's hope that the church "may be gathered." Didache does not include or relate itself to the hope for the gathering of Israel: "The liturgy of the Didache thus shows indications of a community which has ceased to consider itself a variety of Judaism" (ibid.,
103). On the question of whether the Didache depends upon Matthew or vice versa see Alan if P. Garrow, The Gospel of Matthew's Dependence on the Didache (JSNTSup 254; London: T&T
Clark, 2004) and Jens Schréter's recension in TLZ 131 (2006): 997-1000.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH = 375
2.4. JAMES
As the main focus of my paper is on the presence of law of oaths and vows in Matthew and in the Didache, my remarks on James will be very short. James 5:12 preserves a tradition that is very similar to Matt 5:33-37. The major difference between these two traditions is that James does not offer any motivation for why oaths are prohibited, and does not reflect the halakic discussion like Matthew.
How are these traditions related? Hubert Frankemélle summarized the state of the debate as follows: The question if the two texts are related literally "can presently be answered negatively."5° They seem to draw on the same tradition without depending upon each other. Matthew cast this tradition in a form that fits the halakic discourse of his time, while James seems to preserve the original form of the tradition.>! This may even reflect Jesus's teaching.5? We have seen that the prohibition of oaths and vows in Jewish traditions intended to protect the sanctity of God and his name. We do not know whether Jesus shared this interest, although this may very well have been the case if we take into account that the Lord's prayer is highly interested in the sanctification of God's name.>?
How did James adopt this tradition? James is strongly concerned with speech ethics (see 1:26; 3:1-11).>4 James 3:10 links this to an even more important issue in the letter, namely, being "undivided" and "whole" (see 1:4, 6, 17). Words and deeds, faith, and works have to be in accordance with one another (1:22; 2:1417). James 5:12 stresses the importance of what one may call "undivided speech" and thus contributes to the general message of the letter. This passage seems to be even more interested in undivided speech than in simply not swearing oaths, because it is divided speech (and not swearing) that falls under the verdict of judgement.*> If this interpretation is true, one can say that, on the one hand, James does not directly contribute to the Jewish halakic discourse on oaths and vows. He makes use of a tradition that may very well have done so, but he uses it for his own aims. On the other hand, "wholeness" also was a very important issue in 50. Hubert Frankemille, Der Brief des Jakobus (OTK 17/1-2; Giitersloh: Giitersloher Verlagshaus, 1994), 700 (translation mine).
51. Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 258.
52. Ibid., 259.
53. Ibid., 260.
54. See William R. Baker, Personal Speech-Ethics in the Epistle of James (WUNT 2/68;
Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995).
55. See Udo Schnelle, Einleitung in das Neue Testament (5th ed.; UTB 1830; Géttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005), 440: "Man's being divided shall be overcome" (translation mine).
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
ancient Judaism5® and James certainly has a lot to teach on this subject. One would perhaps not go too far in saying that James teaches a "Torah of wholeness"
(see 1:25; 2:8, 12; 4:11). He does so to a Christ-believing audience (James 1:18), whose problems can be reconstructed from the letter's information.>" James's audience is thought to have lived in the Diaspora (1:1) and is explicitly described in Jewish terms.58 The Law and Jesus traditions are part of the same parcel as can be learned from the equation of the "law of freedom" (1:25; 2:12) and the "word of wisdom" (1:18).5? As we have seen above, considering teachings of certain people to be Torah is not unusual in ancient Judaism or, to put it in the rabbinic terms of the Jerusalem Talmud, Scripture, Mishna, Talmud, and haggadah, "even that, which an advanced disciple will teach in the presence of this teacher, all this has already been said to Moses on Sinai" (y. Pe'ah 2, 17a) As such, the instruction is part of the Torah. Thus, the equation of Jesus's teaching and the law only strengthens the Jewish character of this letter.
Far more could be said on James's place within early Christian tradition than I can do in this paper. But if I concentrate on the role of the Torah and the halakah as an indicator for the "Jewishness" of a text and the community it represents, there is nothing that urges me to say that James is already beyond the split between Judaism and Christianity.
3. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we have taken a brief glance at three documents that have a lot in common. We have done so from a specific point of view, the documents' relationship to the halakic discourse on oaths and vows in different Jewish groups.
I hope to have shown that the examination of the way halakic issues are treated in early Christian writings can shed important light on the place of these writings within or outside the framework that is commonly called "ancient Judaism."
Matthew and James turned out to belong to this "entity," which consists of various competing groups, who all relate themselves, even though in different ways,
56. See Vahrenhorst, Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs, 250-55; Martin Meiser, "Vollkommenheit in Qumran und im Matthausevangelium," in Kirche und Volk Gottes (ed. M.
Karrer, W. Kraus and O. Merk; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000), 195-209; see also the contributions of Jens Schréter, Wim Weren, and Patrick Hartin in this volume.
57. Schnelle, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 435. See also Oda Wischmeyer's contribution in this volume.
58. See Scott McKnight, "A Parting Within the Way: Jesus and James on Israel and Purity," in James the Just and Christian Origins (ed. B. Chilton and C. A. Evans; NovTSup 98;
Leiden: Brill, 1999), 82-129.
59, Frankemille, Brief des Jakobus, 353-55; Martin Klein, "Ein vollkommenes Werk":
Vollkommenheit, Gesetz und Gericht als theologische Themen des Jakobusbriefes (BW ANT 139;
Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995), 143-44.
THE PRESENCE AND ABSENCE OF A PROHIBITION OF OATH = 377
to the Torah. As far as the Didache is concerned, I am more sceptical. But halakah is just one factor, although an important one. Other aspects might be added. May the discussion continue.
v2 be
shad Saperscat ane met = Man od sqpstiecsiont hte Te Ot 'iy pane berets.
"am
» ~~. a _ > ° '
~ ou § a8 a :
F > e > =< « '
' as oe io rue 3 how g our wt Brae
: ee nme ra * " ap cam aekliy am) glee Sk hice ow uvhadn BEN '
Ys Pipe "7
3 che & m4 pay. enn? oad cine tat :
od z- :
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND THE DIDACHE
Boris Repschinski, S.J.
Purity is a defining notion in Second Temple Judaism. It played a significant role not only in cultic circumstances such as temple or synagogue worship. Purity was influential in social relations and life in general. Thus Ed P. Sanders wrote:
"Purity regulations were the most obvious and universally kept set of laws."! The origin of purity regulations is somewhat obscure? and need not detain us much longer except for the passing observation that purity regulations could be found not only in Judaism but also in many other cultures of the Middle East, and that they had no obvious hygienic or economic basis.* Perhaps of greater importance is the function of purity regulations to protect order and cohesion within social groups.* 1. Ed P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE-66 CE (London: SCM Press,
1992), 214. For further references on purity see Werner G. Kimmel, "Aufere und innere Reinheit des Menschen bei Jesus," in Heilsgeschehen und Geschichte: Gesammelte Aufsdtze (2 vols.; ed. E. Grasser and O. Merk; Marburger Theologische Studien 16; Marburg: Elwert, 1978), 2:11729; Wilfried Paschen, Rein und Unrein: Untersuchung zur biblischen Wortgeschichte (SANT 24;
Miinchen: Késel, 1970); Jacob Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism (SJLA; Leiden:
Brill, 1973); John K. Riches, Jesus and the Transformation of Judaism (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1980); Roger P. Booth, Jesus and the Laws of Purity: Tradition History and Legal
History in Mark 7 (JSNTSup 13; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986); Franz Mussner, Die Kraft der
Wurzel: Judentum — Jesus ~ Kirche (Freiburg: Herder, 1987), 93-103.
2. Both religious and sociological explanations are proffered, most of them coming down to a possible function of purity to protect from strongly perceived demonic powers. See, e.g.,
Neusner, Idea of Purity, 12; Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 3; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1991), 42-51.
3. Adrian Schenker, "Pureté - impureté," in Dictionnaire critique de théologie (ed. J.-Y.
Lacoste; Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1998), 961-62: "L'exclusion d'animaux impurs des sacrifices et de la table est commune aux peuples du Proche-Orient ancien"; however, even though excluded species can vary, some, like pigs, are common to most of these cultures.
4. These observations go back to the comparative research of Mary Douglas, who observed purity regulations in various tribal cultures, and whose findings were subsequently adapted to the biblical purity systems. See Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966); ibid., Natural Symbols Explora-
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
The Jewish purity system was primarily a matter of Torah, mostly based upon legal material in Leviticus and Numbers. The classic reference is Lev 20:22-26.
Canaanite behavior is revolting to God. He expels them from the land and gives it to his own people who are separated from the Canaanites. The Israelites now are to observe God's distinctions between pure and impure. To distinguish between pure and impure is to be holy as God is holy.
Consequently, the Law sets purity primarily into a cultic context. When someone, through mistake or happenstance, contracted impurity, he or she was not supposed to approach the sanctuary. Impurity erected a boundary between the place where holiness could be encountered, and the person touched by impurity. Within such a cultic reference frame, purity becomes an issue that first and foremost concerns Jewish temple worship. However, purity issues were not restricted to temple worship, but became increasingly important in Diaspora settings, even if in these contexts purity regulations underwent a curious mixture between allegorical and literal interpretation.> The decline of purity systems within Judaism of the rabbinic period may have one cause in the destruction of the temple.® Cultic impurity is usually transmitted by touch, though not exclusively so.
Sources of impurity are corpses, certain skin diseases, usually grouped under the term "leprosy," and different types of effluents like blood or genital discharges.
Impurity can be removed through purification rites such as sacrifices and washing by immersion of the whole or parts of the body. Such rituals have to be performed within a defined time frame. Various types of impurities can be distinguished according to their severity, which in turn is measured by the difficulty in removing the impurity. Corpses are the source of the most serious impurity, but similarly the purification period of leprosy and menstruation is seven days. Lesser forms of impurity can be removed within a period of a day." During the intertestamental period the concept of impurity was widened to include objects like food or vessels. Furthermore, the consumption of impure food has very serious tions in Cosmology (New York: Pantheon Books, 1970). Douglas later revised her views at least partly, noting that the rules of defilement in Numbers and Leviticus probably do not serve to organize social categories. Mary Douglas, In the Wilderness: The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers (JSOTSup 158; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 152-57,
5. Thus Sanders, Judaism, 214, is quite wrong when he restricts most of the impurity rules to the temple. See Aharon Oppenheimer, The Am Ha-Aretz: A Study in the Social History of the Jewish People in the Hellenistic-Roman Period (ALGHJ 8; Leiden: Brill, 1977), 51-62. The Letter of Aristeas and Philo exhibit the strange mixture of allegorical interpretation of purity regulations mixed with the admonitions to keep them literally. For the relevant discussions of these texts see Neusner, Idea of Purity, 44-50.
6. Judaism after the tannaitic period seems to have lost interest in purity. Thomas Kazen,
Jesus and Purity Halakha; Was Jesus Indifferent to Impurity? (ConBNT 38; Stockholm: Almqvist
& Wiksell, 2002), 6.
7. For a diagram of the various levels of impurity see ibid., 5.
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
consequences beyond the usual rites of purification.' Thus Peter's exclamation oddénote Epayov nav Koivdy Kal 4xaBaptov (Act 10:14) sounds like a credible concern with purity.° A further source of impurity was sinful behavior (cf. Isa 1:16; Job 14:4; 15:14;
Ps 51:7), sometimes also sins related to cultic actions.! Such impurity adds the notion of culpability of the impure person. And lastly, purity issues can be raised by genealogical questions.!! This adds the notion of hereditary impurity, perhaps mirrored in the Johannine healing of the blind man through a rite of purification
(John 9:2,6-7). Consequently, impurity as the boundary between a person and the sacred has a shifting relation to the notion of responsibility. While there are many forms of impurity that result from circumstances such as illness or disability, there are other forms of impurity that result directly from acts a person is responsible for. In such a system, impurity becomes an inescapable fact of life.
If purity was such a pervading concern in Second Temple Judaism, Jewish Christian writings would have to address this concern. They do so of course, but a look at the Gospel of Matthew, the Epistle of James, and the Didache shows that these texts do so in quite distinctive ways that set them apart not only from one another, but also from many forms of Judaism known at the time.
1. MATTHEW AND PURITY
The Gospel of Matthew describes the purpose of Jesus's life and death in terms of the forgiveness of sins. Most clearly this happens in the annunciation of Jesus's birth to Joseph, when the angel appears to Joseph in a dream and declares about Jesus: abtd¢ yap owoet Tov Aadv abtod and TOV GpapTidv abT@v (Matt
8. Schenker, "Pureté - impureté," 961, claims: "La consommation impure ne peut étre purifiée." This would explain the acceptance of martyrdom over food controversies in 2 Macc
6-7; however, the issue there seems to go beyond mere impure food by referring to sacrificial meat.
9. Further evidence for the shifting concepts of purity and for an increasing restrictiveness is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. See Hannah K. Harrington, The Impurity Systems of Qumran and the Rabbis: Biblical Foundations (SBLDS 143; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993).
10. Schenker, "Pureté - impureté," 962. Among such sins are necromancy (Lev 19:31) or worship of foreign gods (Hos 6:10; Jer 2:23). Sinfulness amounts to infidelity to God and can lead to impurity (Isa 65:4—6). It may well be asked whether such interlacing of purity issues with moral behavior finds its roots in a prophetic critique of the cult.
11. See Christine Hayes, Gentile Impurities and Jewish Identities: Intermarriage and Conversion from the Bible to the Talmud (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). Hayes' analysis suggests that behind genealogical issues of purity lies the idea that even though Gentiles are not intrinsically impure, since they have not entered the covenant, the mixture of Jewish and Gentile blood leads to impurity. Hence the offspring of such unions would be considered impure.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
1:21). Matthew explains the meaning of the name Jesus in terms of salvation! and draws attention to it (yap) through a wordplay that becomes obvious only through the Hebrew language. It connects the name yw" through the root DW" with the Greek verb owtetv.!3 The careful construction of the angel's prophecy with three progressively weightier verbs in the future tense (té€etat . .
. kahéoetc ...o@o¢t) and the fulfillment of the first two of these within the same pericope not only draws attention to the third verb but also heightens the expectation of the reader to its fulfillment. According to Matthew, the salvation offered through Jesus is the forgiveness of sins offered to the Jewish people.!4
The forgiveness of sins is a christological prerogative. John the Baptist preaches repentance from sin as a way to prepare for the inevitable judgment
(Matt 3:7-10), and indeed, people come to John and confess their sins (Matt 3:6).
However, the purification rite John offers in his baptism!5 is not effective, and he knows so himself. His baptism is one of repentance, but it cannot wash away the sins. In Mark 1:4 John offers Bantiopa petavoiac cig A~eotv apapti@y, but the Matthean John baptizes merely cic petavoiay. It is going to be Jesus who will separate wheat from chaff by a baptism év mvevpati ayi@ Kai mupi (Matt
3:11-12). John's baptism is a warning against any easy expectations of salvation: neither confession nor a purifying baptism will achieve the forgiveness of sins that is the salvation offered by Jesus.
The Matthean description of how Jesus achieves his purpose of the forgiveness of sins is couched in language of purification at the Last Supper. Matthew prepares for this in several ways. First, there is the contextualization of the forgiveness of sins in the controversy with Jesus's opponents. In Matt 9:2-8 the authority and efficaciousness of Jesus's word of forgiveness to the paralytic are at stake. Both are proven, against the evil in the hearts of the opponents (Matt 9:4),
12. For the connection between messianic hopes and hopes for salvation within Judaism see Lidija Novakovic, Messiah, Healer of the Sick: A Study of Jesus as the Son of David in the Gospel of Matthew (WUNT 2/170; Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), 69-73.
13. The wordplay seems to have been common enough with reference to Joshua. Philo
(Mut.121) knows of it even though his knowledge of Hebrew seems quite doubtful. See William
D. Davies and Dale C, Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew (3 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988-97), 1:210.
14. See Boris Repschinski, "'For He Will Save His People from Their Sins' (Matt 1:21): A Christology for Christian Jews," CBQ 68 (2006): 248-67.
15. Immersion as a purification rite is commonly known; see Lev 16:4, 24; 15; 1 QS III,
5-9; Sib. Or. 4.165; Josephus Ant. 18.117; Life 11 etc. See Gerhard Delling, Die Taufe im Neuen
Testament (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1963). John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 49-53, suggests that John's baptism is less connected to purification rites for Jews since the baptism was a once-and-for-all event. Meier thinks that it might be more legitimately connected to the purification of Gentiles received into the Jewish faith. However, there is very little evidence to show that such a rite for the reception of Gentiles was common,
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
through the miraculous cure.!¢ The story shows that Jesus takes up the prophecy of the angel already in his ministry.
A further step towards the purification at the Last Supper concerns Matthew's attitude to the temple!" as it is exhibited in the Jerusalem narrative of the gospel. Jesus begins his stay in the temple of Jerusalem with the cleansing, or purification, of the temple, insisting that the dealers and money changers convert the temple from a house of prayer into a den of robbers (Matt 21:12-13). Then
Matthew goes on to offer a vision of the temple as a house of prayer: the blind and lame are suddenly appearing in the temple, seemingly quite oblivious to the fact that as ritually impure people they do not belong there.!8 At the same time, children acclaim Jesus as the Son of David. When the chief priests and scribes protest at this, the Matthean Jesus offers the quotation of Ps 8:3 (Lxx) to explain that the acclamation of the children is indeed God's way of preparing himself praise in the temple. If the money changers are representative of the temple as a den of robbers, Jesus shows how the temple can be the house of prayer intended by Isa 56:7. The opponents of Jesus align themselves with those who prefer the temple to be a den of robbers.
This particular point is brought home when Jesus, after the Jerusalem controversies and the discourse against Pharisees and scribes, finally leaves the temple.
Matthew has Jesus end his discourse in the temple with a lament over Jerusalem and the temple. Part of the lament is the allusion to Jer 22:5 with the reference to the temple's desertion in Matt 23:38: agietat bpiv 6 oikoc budv Epnpioc. Matthew mentions the opponents of Jesus twice in this short phrase, drawing attention to them as owners of the temple. He indicates that at the end of the Jerusalem controversies Jesus's vision of the temple has come to an end and is left to those who would make it a den of robbers. When immediately after the lament Jesus finally withdraws from the temple (Matt 24:1), God himself is leaving the temple.!9
Now it is truly deserted, and its destruction is its natural consequence. But this also means that the place where purity means most, and where lost purity can be restored, is no longer available.
16. Both elements are redacted to show the continuing power in the Matthean community. See Boris Repschinski, The Controversy Stories in the Gospel of Matthew: Their Redaction,
Form, and Relevance for the Relationship Between the Matthean Community and Formative
Judaism (FRLANT 189; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), 63-75.
17. See Boris Repschinski, "Re-Imagining the Presence of God: The Temple and the Messiah in the Gospel of Matthew," ABR 54 (2006): 37-49.
18. See Lev 21:18 for the prohibition. It is possible that Matthew contrasts the Son of David with the original David who entered Jerusalem by killing the lame and the blind (2 Sam
5:6-8), as suggested by Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on . . . Matthew, 3:140.
19. See Repschinski, "Re-Imagining the Presence of God," 44-47, for the argument, that the withdrawal of Jesus from the temple amounts to a withdrawal of God's presence.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Into this context Matthew places his view of the salvific death of Jesus offered in the narrative of the Last Supper (Matt 26:26-29). Jesus's blood is a symbol of the covenant, and it is to be poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins
(Matt 26:28). A strong cultic subtext informs Matthew's formulation. The word éxxvvvopevov occurs not only in connection with a violent death, but also in the sacrificial context of the Passover sacrifice of the paschal lamb.?° Pouredout blood is a constitutive element of sacrificial rites in the temple, and those sprinkled with it are cleansed and purified.2! Together with the mention of the covenant, Matthew alludes to Exod 24:1-11, which contains all the elements necessary for a sacrificial ritual of purification. Furthermore, the rite of Exod 24 concludes with a meal celebrating the new covenant. Thus, the Last Supper is a creative re-lecture of Exod 24. The reenactment of Exod 24 happens at the trial and crucifixion of Jesus when his blood is indeed poured out and all the people cry for his blood to come upon them (Matt 27:25). In a highly ironic narrative, the purpose of Jesus to save his people from their sins comes to pass as the people call for his death by asking to be sprinkled with his blood.?2
If this is so, then the consequences for the concept of purity in Matthew are dramatic. Purification from sinfulness is no longer achieved through sacrifices offered in the temple. The whole system of purification in the temple is replaced by Jesus himself. Matthew reworks the idea of purification in the sense of forgiveness of sins in the very traditional language of sacrifice and covenant into a very untraditional statement of christological impact. Whatever the temple had to offer is replaced by Jesus. Jesus himself is priest and victim in the sacrifice of purification that is his death, sealing the new covenant.?3 In his death, Jesus replaces the cult in the temple.
If the temple cult is replaced by Jesus, one might expect a reevaluation of cultic purity in terms of christology as well. Matthew does not disappoint. The first example illustrating Matthew's attitude to cultic purity can be encountered in the healing of the leper (Matt 8:1-4). Purity is a defining issue in the peri20. See Joachim Gnilka, Das Matthdusevangelium (2 vols.; HTKNT 1; Freiburg: Herder,
1986), 2:402; Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on .
. Matthew, 3:475; Repschinski, "A Christology for Christian Jews," 260-61.
21. For an overview of such rites consult Christian Eberhart, Studien zur Bedeutung der
Opfer im Alten Testament: Die Signifikanz von Blutund Verbrennungsriten im kultischen
Rahmen (WMANT 94; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2002), 222-88.
22. See Timothy B. Cargal, "'His Blood be Upon Us and Our Children': A Matthean Double Entendre?" NTS 37 (1991): 101-12; D. Sullivan, "New Insights Into Matthew 27.24-5,"
NBf73 (1992): 453-57, and for an argument from the readers' perspective Repschinski, "A Christology for Christian Jews," 263.
23. Matthew exhibits here a striking resemblance to the theology of Hebrews. See Martin
Hasitschka, "Matthew and Hebrews," in Matthew and His Christian Contemporaries (ed. B.
Repschinski and D. Sim; London: Continuum, 2008), 87-103.
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
cope. The leper asks to be purified (xa8apioat), and Jesus commands him to be purified (ka8apio@nt1), with the result that the man is purified at once (evOéwe éxa8apio6n). The triple reference to purity puts the touching act of Jesus into even starker relief. The whole story does not just tell a story concerning a healing miracle, but makes a statement of astonishing impact. Jesus touches the leper, who is not to be touched but instead supposed to cry "unclean, unclean!" (Lev
13:45). And the leper is rendered clean. In redacting his Markan source, Matthew states that the sacrifice prescribed by Moses is no longer about the issue of purity but merely ei¢ paptbpiov adtoic (Matt 8:4). The majority of commentators sees the command to the leper as a witness to the Torah-faithfulness of Jesus, directed at those in the temple.?4 However, this is not entirely convincing. Jesus counteracts conventions regarding purity, and the encounter with Jesus is what purifies, while the ritual in the temple merely serves as testimony. Thus, it is highly plausible to take the dative in its adversative meaning,*> as testimony against those who practice ineffective rituals of purification in the temple.
Further evidence of Matthew's christological approach to cultic purity is provided by Jesus's ease of communicating with Gentiles like the centurion of Capernaum (Matt 8:5-13) or the possessed men of Gadara (Matt 8:28-34).
Particularly the last instance is telling in the description of the men as living in tombs and consequently being very dangerous (Matt 8:28). The evil spirits themselves raise the christological stakes by calling Jesus the Son of God (Matt 8:29).
Interestingly, the whole story is full of agitation, first of the men and their spirits, then of the pigs, then of the herdsmen and the citizens. In the midst of all this,
Jesus remains the calm eye of the storm who just once speaks to give the extraordinarily brief exorcising command bnayete (Matt 8:32). In this sense it is much more a story of reaction to Jesus than it is a story about Jesus himself. It does not raise issues of purity explicitly, but this subtext is underlying much of the account. The upshot of this story is that evil spirits cannot withstand or challenge the Son of God. Fleeing from his presence, they have no other recourse than to throw themselves into what is unclean and destroy themselves.?° Again it is in the person of Jesus where pure and impure separate.
A further example of Matthews approach to cultic purity is the controversy concerning the eating with unwashed hands and the ensuing instruction of crowds and disciples (Matt 15:1-20). The controversy proper (Matt 15:1-9) is
"24, See Donald A.
Hagner, Matthew 1-13 (WBC 334A; Dallas, Tex.: Word Books, 19931996), 1:199.
25. Stanley E. Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament (Biblical Languages: Greek 2;
Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), 98.
26. The text does not, as Hagner, Matthew 1-13, 228, and many other commentators with him suggest, imply that Jesus yields to the demons' request to enter into the pigs. The Matthean bnayete (8:32) is a significant redactional change from the Markan kai énétpewev avtoic (Mark
5:13).
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
partly taken over from Mark 7:1-13, but heavily redacted.27 Matthew shortens Mark's version considerably by omitting Mark's description of Jewish customs of purifications. Matthew presumes knowledge of these. Secondly, Matthew tightens the story's structure by creating three pairs of opposites: Pharisees and scribes are opposed to Jesus (Matt 15:2a.3a), the disciples transgressing the tradition of the elders oppose the Pharisees and scribes transgressing the commandments of God
(Matt 15:2b.3b), and finally God's command opposes the disobedient Pharisees and scribes (Matt 15:4a.5a).28 From the structure of the passage alone it becomes clear that Jesus, his disciples, and God all are on one side, while Pharisees and scribes are on the other side.
As the frontiers are clearly marked, Matthew keeps the issue of purity from debate with the opponents of Jesus. The Markan reference to Kotvaic xepoiv
(Mark 7:5) implying some degree of impurity? is replaced by ob virrtovtat (Matt 15:2). Matthew keeps the discussion of the opposition between the tradition of the elders and the commandments of God separate from a discussion of purity.
This achieves a neat argument for Matthew, since he suddenly does not have to deal with a perceived contrast between purity and the Law as Mark's story still implies. For Matthew, God's Law (tiv évtoAiv tod 8e0d) is not opposed to purity regulations, but to the misguided traditions of the opponents (tiv napadoo.v bu@v, Matt 15:3). Consequently, Matthew's concern with purity does not touch upon the washing of hands before dinner.
However, Matthew does not ignore the underlying purity issues altogether.
In the teaching of the crowds he draws out the consequences with regard to purity of the just concluded controversy (Matt 15:10+11). Suddenly it becomes clear where Matthew sees the real function of a concept of purity. It does not concern eating, but whatever leaves a person's mouth. And in the ensuing instruction of the disciples what is coming out of a person's mouth is defined in ethical terms with sinful behavior that is closely related to the second table of the Decalogue
(Matt 15:19).3° The context for the strongly ethical approach is now mentioned 27. Repschinski, Controversy Stories in the Gospel of Matthew, 154-63.
28. Daniel Patte, The Gospel according to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 216-17.
29. On Koivdc and its implications of "impurity" see Walter Bauer et al., A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (3rd ed.; Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 553. Parallels for such a use include "impure": 1 Macc 1:62;
Rev 21:27; Rom 14:14a; Acts 10:14; Heb 10:29; Diogn. 5.7b. That Matthew understood Mark's use of kotvdg in terms of purity is amply evidenced by the ensuing instructions of crowds and disciples.
30. Die diadoytopoi novnpoi are an introduction to a catalogue of vices all related to the Decalogue. See Davies and Allison, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on .
.. Matthew, 2:53637. They ask whether this might be for mnemonic or catechetical reasons. This is perhaps a possibility, but in view of the preceding controversy and the affirmation of the Law in his
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
five times in 15:11.18. 20 as the issue of purity. At the same time, this community instruction is put into the context of a very strong critique of the Pharisees.
Matthew seems to avoid the discussion of purity and impurity in the context of food or ablutions. In the controversy with the Pharisees he treats purity asa non-issue. On the other hand, within the community purity is quite obviously still a live issue where some sympathize with the Pharisaic position. Thus Matthew notes the way the disciples are taken aback at Jesus's strong criticism of the Pharisees (Matt 15:12). Matthew, however, gives purity a strongly ethical bend that is tied into Law observance. Yet again, Matthew does not take over Mark's clear statement that Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19). This is explainable by Matthew's Law observance. If purity issues are a legal matter, then they cannot be discarded. If Matthew takes the Law as seriously as implied by 5:17-20, then the illicitness of some foods and the purity regulations remain a live issue.
On the other hand, the strongly ethical interpretation of the concept of purity ties into Matthew's willingness to interpret the observance of the Law through the prophets?! at the authority of Jesus.
Matthew's reason for this ethical orientation of purity appears in the story immediately following the discussions of purity around the controversy of eating with unwashed hands. The story of the Canaanite woman also occurs in Mark
7:24-30. But Matthew's changes are telling. Apart from making the woman a little more unlikable,>2 Matthew also inserts a short dialogue between Jesus and the disciples, thus establishing the story more firmly as a story about the community, The problem of Gentiles asking for access to the Jewish community was a matter of lengthy deliberations, as is suggested by the imperfect npwtovv in Matt
15:23. Jesus's answer to the disciples shows where the problem lies: Jesus was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matt 15:24), yet here an annoying
Gentile intrusion into this arrangement takes place, and the woman is not to be dissuaded from her intent of worshipping (mpooextvet, Matt 15:25) Jesus.33 By having just directed purity concerns into an ethical direction, her inclusion into Gospel it is more likely that Matthew's redactional synchronization of his list with the Decalogue has theological reasons.
31. See, e.g., Matt 5:17; 7:12; 9:13; 11:13; 12:7; 17:3; 22:40. Alexander Sand, Das Gesetz und die Propheten: Untersuchungen zur Theologie des Evangeliums nach Matthdus (Biblische
Untersuchungen 11; Regensburg: Pustet, 1974); Klyne Snodgrass, "Matthew and the Law," in Treasures New and Old: Recent Contributions to Matthean Studies (ed. D.R. Bauer and M. A.
Powell; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996), 179-96.
32. So noted by David C. Sim, The Gospel of Matthew and Christian Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community (Studies of the New Testament and Its World;
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998), 223.
33. At this point one has to question Sim's assertion that none of the Gentiles really become disciples of Jesus. Whatever is meant by this expression, the Canaanite woman is a worshipper of Jesus. See Sim, Matthew and Christian Judaism, 223.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
the group of believers becomes suddenly possible, albeit under severe restrictions:
As in Mark, the simile of the bread for the dogs from the table of the children is used, with the woman not at all questioning the designation "dogs." However,
Matthew changes her readiness to eat not, as in Mark, the crumbs of the children, but the crumbs from the table of the masters (t@v kupiwv, Matt 15:27). It is the recognition of the masters that lets Jesus exclaim about the greatness of her faith. Matthew's redirection of purity concerns towards ethics makes table fellowship between Jews and Gentiles possible. It is, however, a table fellowship in which the Jews are clearly the masters. Quite ingeniously Matthew uses purity as a tool of inclusiveness for his community.
The look at the cycle of stories in Matt 8 and the discussion of Matt 15 show how much purity is still an issue of concern to the Matthean community. It seems that at least some in the community had sympathies for the Pharisaic approach to purity. However, Matthew goes another way: He links purity with ethical behavior and ties it in with law observance, so that purity, law observance, and a life according to the ethical norms expressed in the Decalogue and in the great commandments become synonymous to an extent that Matthew can express the final judgment in exclusively ethical terms (Matt 25:31-46). However, this reinterpretation is not arbitrary. It depends on the authority of Jesus whose death is the purifying sacrifice that brings salvation to his people. The Son of God whose blood is sprinkled on his people is the one deciding over purity and impurity.
2. JAMES AND PURITY
It has long been recognized that there are significant parallels between Matthew and James. Mostly these concern similarities in the teaching of Jesus as presented by the Sermon on the Mount and the teaching proposed in the Letter of James.44 However, occasionally James is considerably closer to the Lukan parallel than to Matthew, and even where James and Matthew are close, neither wording nor order of the various sayings are identical. This leads to the conclusion that Matthew and James may share a common tradition, but not necessarily knowledge of each other.5
However, comparing the idea of purity in James and Matthew one quickly discovers that James has but a fleeting interest in the matter, if any at all. In Jas
34, These are conveniently listed by Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1997), 734-5. There are some possible parallels outside of the Sermon on the Mount: Massey H. Shepherd, "The Epistle of James and the Gospel of Matthew," JBL 75 (1956): 40-51.
35. This thesis is widely shared today. An example of its explication can be found in Patrick J. Hartin, James and the Q Sayings of Jesus (JSNTSup 47; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991).
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
1:27 there occurs a reference to Opnoxela kaBapa Kai dpiavtoc,36 which is quite odd considering that the concept of purity usually applies to persons, not, however, to religion. In 4:8 the command ka8apioate xeipac is probably not meant literally since it parallels the command ayvioate kapdiac. Apart from these instances, one might not even guess that James knew anything about purity at all. And so it does not come as a surprise that some authors suggest that even in these instances, James does not really have traditional purity concerns in view.37
But such a solution seems unlikely. Even if in Jas 1:27 ka8apa would not suggest a cultic context or background, 8pnoxeia most certainly does so.°8 If this is so, then it is highly unlikely that the Epistle does not want to suggest traditional notions of purity. Similarly, in Jas 4:8 the command to purify one's hands stands in such close connection to the issue of drawing near to God that it is hard not to assume at least some subtext of purity. The parallel with the command to sanctify the hearts deepens this impression.
Granted that James does allude to traditional Jewish purity issues at least twice, the question of their weight and direction remains. James's purpose and train of thought are notoriously difficult to discern, particularly with regard to Jas 1.39 However, the careful chainlinking*® of the whole of Jas 1 through catchwords suggests that the author saw the seemingly disparate material as somehow connected.*! Furthermore, it is also striking how the material found in Jas 1 returns in variations throughout the letter. Among these are the themes of overcoming temptations (1:2-4,12; 5:7-11), the pleading in faith (1:5-8; 4:3; 5:13-18), the reversal of rich and poor (1:9-11; 2:1-7; 4:13-5:6), the contrast between evil desires and grace (1:13-18; 3:13-4:10), the warnings against the misuse of the tongue (1:19-20; 3:1-12), and the doing of the Word (1:22-27; 2:14-26).4? Apart from the thematic material, figures of speech in Jas 1 also return throughout
36. The Lxx uses the verb juaivw occasionally to denote that someone or something is rendered impure: Lev 5:3; 11:24; 18:24; Num 5:3; Deut 21:23. The expression Gomov éavtdv tnpeiv in the same verse is also regularly associated with ritual purity.
37. As an example of such a view see Franz Schnider, Der Jakobusbrief (RNT; Regensburg:
Pustet, 1987), 53, 103.
38. See LSJ 806; Bauer et al., Greek-English Lexicon, 459.
39. Thus Francois Vouga, L 'épitre de Saint Jacques (CNT 2/13a; Genéve: Labor et Fides,
1984), 66, complains with regard to Jas 1: "Les moments de la parénése ne se suivent pas un ordre immédiatement évident." See also Luke T. Johnson, The Letter of James (AB 37A; New
York: Doubleday, 1995), 174.
40. For the detailed analysis of the links through keywords see ibid., 174.
41, Attempts to divide off Jas 1:2-18 as a rhetorical exordium are unsuccessful because of the internal links of the whole chapter, but also because 1:19-27 remains an unaccounted for fragment. For such an attempt see Hubert Frankemélle, "Das semantische Netz des Jakobusbriefes:
Zur Einheit eines umstrittenen Briefes," BZ 34 (1990): 175-93.
42. Johnson, Letter of James, 175.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
the letter. The most obvious of these is the use of contrasts.43 Thus the chapter is arguably a unit that works to establish topics and figures of speech for the remainder of the Epistle. James 1 functions as an exposition to the whole work.
One further feature that gives cohesion to Jas 1 is the use of metaphors.
These are £otxev KAvVSwvi Bakdaong (1:6), @¢ avOoc xdptov (1:10-11), Eoucev avdpi katavoodvtt TO TPdowNov Tic yevédews adTod év EodmTpw (1:23-24). All three of these metaphors are negative, and all three function as a warning against something that might go wrong with the members of the community. After the greeting in Jas 1:1, the first thing that can go wrong is the lack of patience in temptation. Patience is a work of faith, and in faith can ask God for gifts (Jas
1:5,7). Lacking faith, a person is like an ocean wave, fickle in its ways (1:6-8).
The second thing that can go wrong is the reliance on earthly goods. Thus Jas 1:10-11 warns rich people with the image of a flower wilting in the heat of the sun. Against the lack of patience and the reliance on riches the author sets the grace of a God who gives naoa Sdéoic ayaGi) kai nav SMpnya téAerov (Jas 1:17).
The gifts of God are amply proven by a reference to the creation (ktioic) in which God gives birth to the believer (1:18). The fickleness of the ocean wave and the heat of the sun are contrasted with the God as the father of light who is without variation or change of shadow (1:17).44
The next section admonishes the readers to become doers of the Word planted within them (Jas 1:19-25). The metaphor contained in this section speaks of a person looking at his face tij¢ yevéoews adtod in a mirror (Jas 1:23).
The reference to yéveotc is of double importance. On the one hand, it probably refers to a person's birth, on the other hand it evokes creation as well and as such is a throwback to Jas 1:18 and the gifts of God. The mirror is like the changeable ocean wave and the wilting flower: once seen one forgets immediately what one has seen. Only the look into the perfect law of freedom that does the Word will not forget (Jas 1:25).4> Thus the section is intimately connected to the preceding material.
43. Timothy B. Cargal, Restoring the Diaspora: Discursive Structure and Purpose in the Epistle of James (SBLDS 144; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 56-105, argues that "polar opposites" working throughout James are established in chapter 1.
44. The obvious connection of 1:17 to the two preceding images does not put to question the often proposed interpretation of napaday i) tponi¢ adnooKiacpa as termini technici of astrological phenomena. For a discussion of such possibilities see Vouga, Jacques, 57-58.
A little more cautious, also in view of the significant textual variants, is Johnson, Letter of James, 196-97, 45. The confusion this metaphor creates among commentators is simply astonishing.
Ralph P. Martin, James (WBC 48; Dallas, Tex.: Word, 1988), 49, translates Jas 1:23 as "the face that nature gave him" and misses the point; it is precisely not the face that nature gave the person, but that God gave the person as one of his good gifts. Similarly Johnson, Letter of James, 207, 214, argues that the mirror remains the same, but what one sees in the mirror shifts
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
39] The following two verses (Jas 1:26-27) conclude the section by drawing its suggestions together. Again James alludes to those that merely hear the Word and do not do it, thus showing themselves to be changeable waves, wilting flowers, or forgetful mirror watchers. But this time, he puts this kind of behavior into the context of worship. James now contrasts the worthless worship of the hearers with the pure and unblemished worship of the doers. Thus what the whole chapter has been leading up to is now made explicit. At the heart of the metaphors used in Jas 1 is the exhortation to a worship what is pure and undefiled and that renders a person undefiled as well.
The astonishing feature of James is, however, that the idea of pure worship is not a mere cultic procedure of ablutions, or even faithfulness to the Law.
Purity of worship is achieved in acts of charity to widows and orphans. Charity is circumscribed with the word émoxénteo@at. In Lxx usage this word refers almost exclusively to God visiting or saving his people. Widows and orphans are the "classic recipients"*® of God's and Israel's care and take up the theme of the reversal of rich and poor alluded to in Jas 1:9-11. Thus the assistance of the needy becomes the singular way of achieving a worship that fulfills the demands of purity. James replaces rites of purification with ethical demands and puts them into the context of ritual purity.
A similar use of the purity imagery can be noted with regard to 4:8. Firstly, James puts purity into the context of approaching God, who in turn himself approaches humans. Thus the context is cultic at least in its overtones.4" Secondly, the purification of hands and the sanctification of hearts*8 are constructed in parallelism and, consequently, are meant to signify the same fact. The reference to double mindedness (diyvxor) creates the bridge back to Jas 1:8.
If the readers of Jas 4:8 are exhorted to purify hands and sanctify hearts, the context of Jas 4:1-10 gives a glimpse of why purification is necessary. In 4:1-3 James speaks of wars and conflicts in the community that have their roots in desires and lead to murder and envy.*? Obviously James uses the words in from the face to the perfect law. The confusion has its origin in the misinterpretation of the parable, where both equate the natural face with the face presented by the perfect law of 1:19.
However, the metaphor does not run this way. It compares not what one sees, but it compares the instrument that makes one see: katavoodvtt .
. . év o06ntpw (1:23) and napakvyac eic vouov (1:25).
46. See Johnson, Letter of James, 212, with references.
47. Johnson, Letter of James, 284; differently Schnider, Jakobusbrief, 103, who sees a prophetic as opposed to a cultic tradition behind Jas 4:8.
48. Both words used here occur frequently in reference to cultic purity. For ayviCetv see
Exod 19:10; Num 8:21; 19:12; 31:23.
49. On the connections of this imagery with the Jewish Two Ways tradition see Huub van de Sandt, "James 4,1-4 in the Light of the Jewish Two Ways Tradition 3,1-6," Bib 88 (2007):
38-63.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
exaggeration. But if war and murder are exaggerations, they highlight the problems behind them. In 4:4-6 it becomes obvious that the war is one that involves friendship with the world and friendship with God as polar opposites. Only one of them can be chosen, and James's call to purification and sanctification is a call to choose friendship with God over friendship with the world. To be purified and to be sanctified means that one is no longer diyvxoc, that one has taken the necessary decision to end war and conflict, the decision for friendship with God. This decision finally involves the self-humiliation before God in order to be raised by him.
In order to fill the rather abstract concept of friendship with the world with content, several solutions have been proposed.>°° But quite apart from the particular meaning given to povevete or paxeo0¢ kai mohepeite (Jas 4:2) and puria tod
Kdopov (Jas 4:4), the words evoke the world of ethics. Thus the call to purification of hands and sanctification of hearts call for a decision to be made between particular behavior towards others that James sees as springing from desires, and the behavior towards God that consists of weeping and mourning and humiliation but will finally lead to exaltation by God. The language of reversal>! puts perspective on the wars and conflicts arising out of desires. It is reasonable to assume that with the reversal before God the reversal of the behavior among the community members is in view, where the lust for possessions gives way to humility before one another.
Again in this short allusion in Jas 4:8 it becomes clear that James is interested in the concept of purity and willing to use it as long as it illuminates the moral standards of behavior concerned with social justice. If in Jas 1 the traditional biblical appeal to widows and orphans highlights the demands of purity, here it is the war between the haves and have-nots. However, in and of itself, purity is not a concern to James.
3. THE DIDACHE AND PURITY
While the Didache may indeed be a document reflecting a Jewish Christian orientation,» it also exhibits compromises made when accommodating Gentiles
50. Martin, James, 143-44, suggests misguided faith. Johnson, Letter of James, 286-87, amplifies this with suggestions of a background in Jewish Wisdom literature and Hellenistic literature and suggests that a double moral standard is at issue, one for dealing with God and another for dealing with people. Matthias Konradt, Christliche Existenz nach dem Jakobusbrief:
Eine Studie zu seiner soteriologischen und ethischen Konzeption (SUNT 22; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), 125-35, sees the issue of rich and poor in the background.
51. Johnson, Letter of James, 286.
52. For the state of research, see Jonathan A. Draper, "The Apostolic Fathers: The Didache," ExpTim 117 (2006): 177-81. For the minority opinion that the Didache is a cohesive and complete early Jewish Christian document see Aaron Milavec, The Didache: Faith, Hope,
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
into the group (Did. 1:1). Such compromises are little known to Matthew.53 Most clearly this appears when Didache treats the concept of purity. The first instance of teaching that may be related to purity occurs at the end of the teaching on the Two Ways with a reference to dAov tov Cuydv tod Kupiov and to Tis Bpwoewe
(6:2,3).>4 Occasionally it has been speculated that this is a Jewish appendix. Consequently, the yoke would refer to the Jewish Law.55 Even though this might fit well with the following reference to the food regulations, the context suggests much more a reference to the teaching of Jesus as explicated in the preceding chapters.>° But if the yoke as the Law of Christ is paired with reference to food regulations, the author also suggests that the community under Law of Christ is still observing some form of food regulations, even if, as Did. 6:3 suggests, compromises are necessary.
But the reference to compromises is a telling one, because it shifts the focus to a considerable extent. If the Jewish purity system was to ensure the correct worship, the Didache emphasizes the believers and their ability or inability to keep these rules. The emphasis on purity is not to ensure proper worship, but to encourage moral behavior among the believers. But the cultic connection is not entirely lost. The severe prohibition of the cidiwXd8uta is legitimized with reference to Aatpeia of dead deities. For the author of the Didache, purity, like the teaching of the Two Ways, is a desirable idea in order to reach perfection, but in the end the author gives in to the realities of his community and suggests an observation of both iuxta modum. Similar advice can be found in the baptismal instruction to use living water (7:1-3).
Thus purity in the Didache is an issue related to the practical life within the community. The only place where purity is explicitly mentioned clarifies this further. When the Didache speaks about how to achieve the necessary purity to celebrate the Eucharist (Did. 14), it speaks about the confession of sins (ta napantmpata), taking up the teaching of the Two Ways (Did. 4:14), as a pre- & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50 - 70 C. E. (New York: Newman Press, 2003); for more general arguments concerning the Jewish background of the Didache see Huub van de Sandt and David Flusser, The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and Its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (CRINT 3/5; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2002), and the various essays in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? (ed. H. van de Sandt;
Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005).
53. See Boris Repschinski, "Matthew and Luke," in Matthew and His Christian Contemporaries (ed. B. Repschinski and D. Sim; London: Continuum, 2008), 50-65.
54. Kurt Niederwimmer, Die Didache (2nd ed.; Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vatern
1; Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), 153, speaks of the "interpretatorischen und erganzenden Charakter" of this appendix to the Two Ways teaching.
55. Alfred Stuiber, "'Das ganze Joch des Herrn' (Didache 6,2-3)," StPatr 4 (1961): 323Ses
56. See Niederwimmer, Die Didache, 155-56. A similar use of Gvydc is found in Matt
11:29,
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
requisite to guarantee the purity of the 6voia.>" These sins are being explicated further as augiBoAfav peta tod étaipov (Did. 14:2). Very concrete quarrels°8 within the community are the things that will render a Sunday sacrifice unclean
(kotvw6f}). In order to legitimize such a demand for purity the Didache finally quotes Mal 1:11.14, a fitting conclusion to an argument on purity that is concerned with 6voiav kaBapav (Did. 14:3).
Yet as much as Did. 14 may be concerned with purity, it merely repeats the argument already made in Did. 10:6 about the restrictions concerning access to the Eucharist. There Didache stated: ei tic &ytdg Eotiv, EpxéoOuei Tic OdK Eott, wetavoeitw. Again access to the Eucharist is under discussion, and again it is restricted to those who are in need of conversion, presumably because of sins that need redressing.°? However, here the purity of the Eucharist is not mentioned, although purity concerns seem at the back of the argument in Did. 10:6 as well. Instead, the focus rests on the holiness of those having access to it.
Quite similar to Matthew, Didache takes up purity concerns and interprets them ethically. However, quite distinct from Matthew, the purity teaching in Didache concerns the community and its celebration of its liturgies. Its direction is inward. Therefore, purity becomes an issue of separation of those who are worthy from those who are not. While Matthew ingeniously uses purity to guarantee the inclusiveness of his community, Didache emphasizes the exclusivity of its liturgical celebrations.
4. CONCLUSION
The three texts under consideration all deal to some extent with purity. With Matthew the attention to the concept of purity is certainly greatest, and it also yields the greatest theological value. To conceive of purity in terms of christology and to declare Jesus the final and definitive sacrifice that purifies the believers is a great theological achievement. Apart from Matthew only Hebrews makes this leap in the New Testament. The consequence for the believer in Matthew's Christ is far reaching. Even though Matthew never quite says so explicitly, implicitly the whole system of purity comes to an end in Jesus. If Jesus through his death purifies the believer, there is no need for further purifications or indeed food
57. For our investigation, the question of whether 6voia refers to the breaking of the bread or to the eucharistic prayer is negligible. It is questionable whether the author would have intended such a fine distinction; see Niederwimmer, Die Didache, 237. The concepts of purity and of sacrifice are closely related, and thus the one may have provoked the other.
58. The lexical meaning of dugiPodia as "being beleaguered from two sides" does not quite fit either context or use in connection with &etv . . . peta. Thus "quarrel" seems to make the most sense; LSJ, 90; Bauer et al., Greek-English Lexicon, 55.
59. The demand for holiness seems an additional condition quite apart from the baptism mentioned in Did. 9:5,
PURITY IN MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
laws. Matthew makes this point by his treatment of the earthly Jesus approaching people of varying degrees of impurity. The concept of purity is harnessed into showing how Jesus is indeed the Son of God and Messiah for a Jewish community that is ready to include Gentiles among its group.
James and Didache show less interest in the issue of purity. This may be due in part to their greater dialogue with Gentile converts within their respective communities. Purity is no longer stringently argued as a theological topos but becomes one of many metaphors to illustrate the right behavior in the community. What renders pure is almost entirely related to people's ethical behavior.
Furthermore, when Didache speaks about purity it does not speak about people but worship. The moral behavior affects the quality of worship, and consequently immoral behavior has to be kept apart from worship. The sacrifice does not purify the believer, but the believer can render the sacrifice unclean, a belief that is popular even in today's churches.
If all three writings under discussion deal with the issue of purity, Matthew is perhaps the closest to the Jewish traditions of purity. However, there is no denying that in the last consequence, all three writings break with the traditions as well, Matthew by reinterpreting them considerably, James and Didache by mostly ignoring them. Of course one may ask why purity could be so easily dispensed with even in texts much closer to Jewish traditions than Mark's Gospel, to name but one. One reason may well be the destruction of the temple and the concomitant disappearance of many of the rituals legitimizing cultic purity. But there may be another reason for this as well, and it has to do with christology.
A belief in an earthly Jesus who touches and heals sick people, lepers, sinners, and generally unclean people, calls purity concerns into question. If this earthly Jesus is subsequently put to death but believed to have been raised by God, then even the most serious cultic impurity loses its persuasiveness. If the greatest challenge to cultic purity is the contact with a corpse, then the belief in a bodily resurrection puts not just death into question, but also severely relativizes any questions of purity associated with death and corpses. It seems to be the very nature of resurrection faith to delegitimize any notions of cultic purity. Matthew,
I think, has sensed this to some extent. Consequently, he tried to save purity for coming generations in connecting it with the death of Jesus as a saving and purifying sacrifice. Others, like James and the Didache, relegate the concept of purity to a metaphor qualifying certain behavior, or just do away with it completely.
" ee ae 17 A ee STM a ae .
— ee saad iephaoedl al ea to (Mt iy « ocgah gee sei ae : atl brea? weed sisahngined eat aia tee ardiage ogden iaa a hag:
Cs b Sv aoe urge 2 ebnid awa au bd ote 7 = é ial ,; i sac peewee nad, (Cy ee = :
Sep n apt etiet ee ey
(Pe Line ated Venti as sygack 2 @ ge) Ghetto Piet pu. avait J:
Se ae Cede aap dighottinee eee ee gy PAL Sy ae rte iveds Ama iy Spee i le:
Bart
Lt gets Fee © ivy as hee bs PITY Oh
Ek MP CSC
FED odineaiiel i } y ata ; ha ee < Ddiiabiialiaamailt Si germ a a, teh is athe Ct Scpotibay! tohiel Steph : iy aR o>? Quetta ioe nee eee ong gf E'S ath oan eS tes Tepe OA) ea '
+ gh«/ Soom mi eek @ hile eee eee lh MTA Ma iw hG wo > peelnead ys oe eee hatte vb so dere Gare oh ots wale AOD i « Lee +p ar seek aunts 6/0 Bs ree ae Cenw'
Eco of 1 Mall gr Baerga aah teat Sp) ore) ay Sits Gam apa coheed * 2 te Se gute denen igs : j nh ie = nn ee a Se ee eer ete 5 ee on et an ie or"4) &* peoigegye athendodbo ta:
AW, er nha abd aan Lwse Searels sae Gallas ee ee ee er) colds Peseta pares iehiieals bas Parr ars ee en os ed ech cintonn , cat rg _ atl ji, oven Gita ol gen 1 by Nomar "
oF peep h inttap es eres a sai Taek hal shegne Sia Pe oched 'fea bees ' i 'ate ance a, ain oA a AeA Aa ee Miele y : ile as da Py "~ ae | 7.) —F year wert | ey ER a + Wee otas a: el we oc + ioe sal, SO ianeqieaia a aS vee ha : e ele aS _ rr meee baie:
'aia
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abrahams, Israel. Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1917. Repr., New York: Ktav, 1967 Adam, Adolf. "Erwagungen zur Herkunft der Didache," ZKG 68 (1957): 1-47.
Adamson, James B. The Epistle of James. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976.
Aderet, Avraham. From Destruction to Restauration: The Mode of Yavneh in Re-Establishment of the Jewish People. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1990.
Akenson, Donald H. Saint Saul: A Skeleton Key to the Historical Jesus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Albeck, Chanoch. The Mishna: Seder Nashim. Tel Aviv: Debir, 1988.
Aleksandrov, G. S. "The Role of "Aqiba in the Bar Kokhba Rebellion." Pages 422-36 in Eliezer ben Hyrcanus: The Tradition and the Man. Edited by J. Neusner. Vol 2. SJLA
3-4. Leiden: Brill, 1973. Repr. in REJ 132 (1973): 65-77.
Alexander, Philip S. "Rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament." ZNW 74 (1983): 237-46.
Alon, Gedalyahu. "The Halaka in the Epistle of Barnabas." Tarbiz 11 (1939-40): 23-38,
223. Repr. as pages 295-312 in Studies in Jewish History in the Times of the Second
Temple, the Mishna and the Talmud. 2 vols. 2nd. ed. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad,
1967-70 (Hebrew).
——. "The Halakha in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles." Pages 165-94 in The Didache in Modern Research. Edited by J. A. Draper. Translated by A. Ben-Meir. AGJU 37.
Leiden: Brill, 1996. Translation of "Ha-halaka ba-Torat 12 ha-Shelihim." Tarbiz 11
(1939-40): 127-45. Repr. as pages 274-94 in Studies in Jewish History in the Times of the Second Temple, the Mishna and the Talmud. 2 vols. 2nd. ed. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz
Hameuchad, 1967-70 (Hebrew).
——. The Jews in Their Land in the Talmudic Age. 2 vols. Jerusalem: Magnes, 198084. Translation of Toledot ha-Yehudim be-Erets-Yisrael bi-tekufat ha-Mishna wehaTalmud. 2 vols. Tel-Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad, 1967-70.
. Jews, Judaism, and the Classical World. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1977.
—_. "Sociological Method in the Study of the Halacha." Tarbiz 10 (1938-39): 241-82
(Hebrew).
——.. Studies in Jewish History in the Times of the Second Temple, the Mishna and the Talmud. 2 vols. 2nd. ed. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1967-70 (Hebrew).
Amélineau, Emile C. Monuments pour servir a l'histoire de l'Egypte chrétienne aux IVe,
Ve, Vie et VIle siécles. 2 vols. Mémoires publiés par les membres de la mission archéologique du Caire 4; Paris: Leroux, 1888-95.
Anderson, Hugh. "4 Maccabees." Pages 531-64 in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol.
2. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983-85.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Appelbaum, Shimon. Prolegomena to the Study of the Second Jewish Revolt (A.D. 132-135 ).
British Archaeological Reports. Supplementary Series 7. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 1976.
Assmann, Jan. "Form as Mnemonic Device: Cultural Texts and Cultural Memory.' Pages
67-82 in Performing the Gospel: Orality, Memory and Mark. Essays dedicated to Werner Kelber. Edited by R. A. Horsley, J. A. Draper, and J. M. Foley. Minneapolis:
Fortress, 2006.
Atchley, Edward G. C. F. On the Epiclesis of the Baptismal Liturgy and in the Consecration of the Font. London: Humphrey Milford, 1935.
Audet, Jean-Paul. La Didaché: Instructions des Apétres. EBib. Paris: Gabalda, 1958.
Aune, David E. "Distinct Lexical Meanings of AIIAPXH in Hellenism, Judaism and Early
Christianity." Pages 103-29 in Early Christianity and Classical Culture: Studies in Honour of Abraham J. Malherbe. Edited by J. T. Fitzgerald, T. H. Olbricht, and L.
M.White. NovTSup 105. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
. Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1983.
Austin, John L. How to do Things with Words. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1975.
Baarda, Tjitze. "The Sentences of the Syriac Menander." Pages 583-606 in vol. 2 of The Old
Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983-85.
Bacher, Wilhelm. Die exegetische Terminologie der jiidischen Traditionsliteratur. 2 vols.
Leipzig 1899-1905. Repr., Hildesheim: Olms, 1965.
Bacon, Benjamin W. Studies in Matthew. London: Constable, 1930.
Baer, Yizhak. "The Historical Foundations of the Halakha." Zion 27 (1962): 117-55
(Hebrew).
; Bagatti, Bellarmino. The Church from the Circumcision: History and Archaeology of the Judaeo-Christians. Translated by Eugene Hoade. Publications of the Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Smaller Series 2. Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press, 1971.
Baker, William R. Personal-Speech Ethics in the Epistle of James. WUNT 2/68. Tiibingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1995.
Baldwin, Barry H. "Lucian as Social Satirist." Classical Quarterly NS 11 (1961): 199-208.
Bammel, Ernst. "ntwx6¢, mrwxeia, mrwxevdw." Pages 888-915 in vol. 6 of Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich.
Barclay, John M.G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE
-117 CE). Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996.
Baron, Salo W. "Ghetto and Emancipation: Shall We Revise the Traditional View?" The Menorah Journal 14 (1928): 515-26.
Bauckham, Richard J. ed., The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998.
- James: Wisdom of James: Disciple of Jesus the Sage. New Testament Readings.
London: Routledge, 1999.
Baudissin, Wolf W. Graf. "Die alttestamentliche Religion und die Armen." Preussische Jahrbiicher 149 (1912): 193-231.
Bauer, Walter. Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der friihchristlichen Literatur. 6th ed. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988.
. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity. Edited by R. A. Kraft and G. Krodel.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971. Translation of Rechtglaubigkeit und Ketzerei im dltesten
Christentum. BHT 10. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1934.
Bauer, Walter, W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. Danker. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Bazzana, Giovanni B. "Early Christian Missionaries as Phyisicians: Christian Sources in the Context of Greco-Roman Medical Practice." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Context Group, Ashton Pa., March 15-18, 2007.
Beare, Francis W. The Gospel according to Matthew:
A Commentary. Oxford: Blackwell, 1981.
Becker, Hans-Jiirgen. Auf der Kathedra des Mose: Rabbinisch-theologisches Denken und antirabbinische Polemik in Matthaus 23,1-12. ANTZ 4. Berlin: Institut fiir Kirche und Judentum, 1990.
Ben-Haim Trifon, Dalia. "Some Aspects of Internal Politics Connected with the BarKokhva Revolt." Pages 13-26 in The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New Approach. Edited by A. Oppenheimer and U. Rappaport. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984 (Hebrew).
Berger, Peter L., and Thomas Luckmann. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1966.
Berner, Ulrich. "Moderner und antiker Religionsbegriff" Pages 13-21 in vol. 1 of Neues
Testament und Antike Kultur. Edited by K. Erlemann, K.L. Noethlichs, K. Scherberich and J. Zangenberg. 2nd ed. 5 vols. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
2004 -2007.
Betz, Hans Dieter. Galatians:
A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.
——.. "A Jewish-Christian Cultic Didache in Matt. 6:1-18: Reflections and Questions on the Problem of the Historical Jesus." Pages 55-69 in Essays on the Sermon on the Mount. Edited by H. D. Betz. Translated by L. L. Welborn. Philadelphia: Fortress,
1985.
—. The Sermon on the Mount: A Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, including the Sermon on the Plain (Matthew 5:3-7:27 and Luke 6:20-49). Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995.
——. "The Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:3-7:27): Its Literary Genre and Function."
Pages 1-16 in Essays on the Sermon on the Mount. Edited by H. D. Betz. Translated by L. L. Welborn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.
Binder, Donald D. Into the Temple Courts: The Place of the Synagogue in the Second Temple
Period. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999.
Bloomquist, L. Gregory. "The Rhetoric of the Historical Jesus." Pages 98-117 in Whose
Historical Jesus? Edited by W. E. Arnal and M. Desjardins. Etudes sur le christianisme et judaisme/Studies in Christianity and Judaism 7. Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfred
Laurier University Press, 1997.
Bohl, Felix. Gebotserschwerung und Rechtsverzicht als ethisch-religidse Normen in der rabbinischen Literatur. Frankfurter Judaistische Studien 1. Freiburg i. B.: Schwarz,
1971.
Booth, Roger P. Jesus and the Laws of Purity: Tradition History and Legal History in Mark 7.
JSNTSup 13. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986.
Bornkamm, Ginther. "Der Aufbau der Bergpredigt." NTS 24 (1978): 419-32.
. "The Stilling of the Storm in Matthew." Pages 52-57 in Tradition and Interpretation
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
in Matthew. Edited by G. Bornkamm, G. Barth, and H. J. Held. London: SCM, 1963.
Bradshaw, Paul F, Maxwell E. Johnson, L. Edward Phillips, and Harold W. Attridge, eds.
The Apostolic Tradition. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002.
Brandon, Samuel G. F. The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church: A Study of the Effects of the Jewish Overthrow of A.D. 70 on Christianity. London: SPCK, 1951.
Braumann, Georg. "Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes." TZ 18 (1962):
401-10.
Broer, Ingo. "Anmerkungen zum Gesetzesverstandnis des Matthaus." Pages 128-45 in Das
Gesetz im Neuen Testament. Edited by K. Kertelge. QD 108. Freiburg: Herder, 1986.
. Freiheit vom Gesetz und Radikalisierung des Gesetzes: Ein Beitrag zur Theologie des
Evangelisten Matthdus. SBS 98. Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1980.
Brown, Delwin. "Thinking About the God of the Poor: Questions for Liberation Theology from Process Thought." JAAR 57 (1989): 267-81.
Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. ABRL. New York: Doubleday,
1997.
Brown, Raymond E., and John P. Meier. Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles of Catholic Christianity. New York: Paulist Press, 1983.
Bultmann, Rudolph. Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition. 8th ed. FRLANT 29. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970.
———. Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition. 9th ed. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1979.
Burchard, Christoph. "Das doppelte Liebesgebot in der friihen christlichen Uberlieferung"
Pages 3-26 in Studien zur Theologie, Sprache und Umwelt des Neuen Testaments.
Edited by D. Sanger. WUNT 107. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.
. Der Jakobusbrief. HNT 15/1. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000.
——. "Versuch, das Thema der Bergpredigt zu finden." Pages 27-50 in Studien zur Theologie, Sprache und Umwelt des Neuen Testaments, Edited by D. Sanger. WUNT 107.
Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.
——. "Zu einigen christologischen Stellen des Jakobusbriefes." Pages 353-68 in Anftnge der Christologie. Edited by C. Breytenbach and H. Paulsen. Géttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1991 Burgess, Theodore C. "Epideictic Literature." The University of Chicago Studies in Classical
Philology 3 (1902): 89-261.
Burridge, Kenelm., New Heaven, New Earth: A Study of Milenarian Activities. New York:
Schocken, 1969.
Byrne, Brendan. "The Messiah in Whose Name "The Gentiles Will Hope' (Matt 13:21):
Gentile Inclusion as an Essential Element of Matthew's Christology." ABR 50 (2002):
55-73.
Callan, Terrance. "The Background of the Apostolic Decree (Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25)" CBQ
55 (1993): 284-97, Campenhausen, Hans F. von. "Taufen in dem Namen Jesu?" VC 25 (1971): 1-15.
Cancik, Hubert, Burkhard Gladigow, and Matthias Laubscher, eds., Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe. 5 vols. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1988 -2001.
Cargal, Timothy B. "'His Blood be Upon Us and Our Children': A Matthean Double Entendre?" NTS 37 (1991): 101-12.
. Restoring the Diaspora: Discursive Structure and Purpose in the Epistle of James.
SBLDS 144. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Carleton Paget, James. "The Definition of the Terms Jewish Christian and Jewish Christianity in the History of Research." Pages 22-52 in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries. Edited by O. Skarsaune and R. Hvalvik. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2007.
. 'Jewish Christianity" Pages 731-75 of vol. 3 of The Cambridge History of Judaism.
Edited by W. Horbury, W. D. Davies, and J. Sturdy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Carrington, Philip. The Primitive Christian Catechism: A Study in the Epistles. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1940.
Carter, Warren. Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press
International, 2001.
———. Matthew and the Margins: A Sociopolitical and Religious Reading. Maryknoll, N.Y.:
Orbis, 2000.
——.. "Matthew and the Gentiles: Individual Conversion and/or Systemic Transformation?" JSNT 26 (2004): 259-82.
Causse, Antonin. Les «Pauvres» d'Israél (Prophétes, Psalmistes, Messianistes). Strasbourg:
Librairie Istra, 1922.
Charles, J. Daryl. "Garnishing with the 'Greater Righteousness': The Disciple's Relationship to the Law (Matthew 5:17-20)." BBR 12 (2002): 1-15.
Charlesworth, James H. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday, 1983-85.
Cheung, Luke L. The Genre, Composition and Hermeneutics of James. Paternoster Biblical and Theological Monographs. Carlisle: Paternoster, 2003.
Chilton, Bruce D., and Craig A. Evans eds. James the Just and Christian Origins. NovTSup
98. Leiden: Brill, 1999.
Cohen, Shaye J. D. "Respect for Judaism by Gentiles According to Josephus."
HTR 80 (1987): 409-30.
——.. "The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of Jewish Sectarianism."
HUCA 55 (1984): 28-53.
Connolly, Richard H. "New Fragments of the Didache." JTS 25 (1924): 151-53.
Cooper, R. M. "Prayer: A Study in Matthew and James." Enc 29 (1968): 268-77.
Crosby, Michael. House of Disciples: Church, Economics, and Justice in Matthew. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1988.
Crossan, John D. The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant. San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1991.
Crossley, James G. The Date of Mark's Gospel: Insight from the Law in Earliest Christianity.
JSNTSup 266. London: T&T Clark, 2004.
Crouzel, Henri. "L'Imitation et la 'Suite' de Dieu et de Christ dans les premieres siécles
Chrétiens, ainsi que leurs sources Gréco-Romaines et Hébraiques." Pages 7-41 in Jahrbuch fiir Antike und Christentum. Jahrgang 21. Minster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung 1978.
Daniélou, Jean. The Theology of Jewish Christianity. London: Darton, Longman & Todd,
1964. Translation of Théologie du judéo-christianisme. Tournai: Desclée, 1958.
Davids, Peter H. The Epistle of James: A Commentary on the Greek Text. NIGTC. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.
———. "Palestinian Traditions in the Epistle of James.' Pages 33-57 in James the Just and Christian Origins. Edited by B. D. Chilton and C. A. Evans. NovTSup 98. Leiden:
Brill, 1999.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Davies, William D. The Sermon on the Mount. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1966.
—_. The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount. Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University
Press, 1964.
Davies, William D., and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. ICC. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988-97.
Deines, Roland. Die Gerechtigkeit der Tora im Reich des Messias: Mt 5,13-20 als Schliisseltext der matthdischen Theologie. WUNT 177. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004.
Delling, Gerhard. Die Taufe im Neuen Testament. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt,
1963.
. "tée10¢." Pages 68-79 in vol. 8 of Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament.
Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. 10 vols. in 12. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1932-79.
Del Verme, Marcello. Didache and Judaism: Jewish Roots of an Ancient Christian—Jewish
Work. New York: T&T Clark, 2004.
Deppe, Dean B. The Sayings of Jesus in the Epistle of James. Ph.D. diss. Chelsea, Mich.:
Bookcrafters, 1989.
Descamps, Albert. "Essai d'interprétation de Mt 5,17-48: Formgeschichte ou Redactionsgeschichte?" SE 1 (1959): 156-73.
Dibelius, Martin. James: A Commentary on the Epistle of James. Edited by H. Koester.
Translated by M. A. Williams. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975. Translation of Der Brief des Jakobus. 11th ed. KEK 15. Rev. by H. Greeven. Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964.
Dibelius, Martin, and Hans Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972.
Dietzfelbinger, Christian. "Die Antithesen der Bergpredigt im Verstandnis des Matthaus."
ZNW 70 (1979): 1-15.
Donfried, Karl P. "The Allegory of the Ten Virgins (Mt 25:1-13) as a Summary of Matthean Theology." JBL 94 (1974): 415-28.
Douglas, Mary T. In the Wilderness: The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers.
JSOTSup 158. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.
——. "Jokes." Pages 90-114 in Implicit Meanings: Essays in Anthropology. Edited by M. T.
Douglas. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975.
. Natural Symbols Explorations in Cosmology. New York: Pantheon Books, 1970.
. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966.
Draper, Jonathan A. "The Apostolic Fathers: The Didache." ExpTim 117 (2006): 177-81.
. "Christian Self-Definition against the 'Hypocrites' in Didache VIII." Pages 223-43 in The Didache in Modern Research, Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill,
1996.
——. "The Didache in Modern Research: An Overview.' Pages 1-42 in The Didache in Modern Research, Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
———.. "Do the Didache and Matthew Reflect an 'Irrevocable Parting of the Ways' with Judaism?" Pages 217-41 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum,
2005.
———. "First Fruits and the Support of Prophets, Teachers and the Poor in Didache 13 in Relation to New Testament Parallels." Pages 223-43 in Trajectories through the New
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Testament and the Apostolic Fathers. Edited by A. Gregory and C. Tuckett. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2005.
——. "The Genesis and Narrative Thrust of the Paraenesis in the Sermon on the Mount"
JSNT 75 (1999): 25-48.
———. "The Holy Vine of David made known to the Gentiles through God's servant Jesus: "Christian Judaism' in the Didache." Pages 257-83 in Jewish Christianity
Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts. Edited by M. Jackson-McCabe.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
——. "Jesus' 'Covenantal Discourse' on the Plain (Luke 6:12-7:17) as Oral Performance:
Pointers to 'Q' as Multiple Oral Performance." Pages 71-98 in Oral Performance, Popular Tradition, and Hidden Transcript in Q. Edited by R. A. Horsley. SemeiaSt
60. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.
——. "The Jesus Tradition in the Didache." Pages 72-91 in The Didache in Modern Research. Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Repr. from pages
269-87 in The Jesus Tradition Outside the Gospels. Edited by D. D. Wenham. Gospel
Perspectives 5. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985.
——. "Ritual Process and Ritual Symbol in Didache 7-10," VC 54 (2000): 121-58.
——. "Social Ambiguity and the Production of Text: Prophets, Teachers, Bishops, and Deacons and the Development of the Jesus Tradition in the Community of the Didache." Pages 284-312 in The Didache in Context: Essays on its Text, History, and Transmission. Edited by C. N. Jefford. NovTSup 77. Leiden: Brill, 1995.
———.. "Torah and Troublesome Apostles in the Didache Community." Pages 340-63 in The Didache in Modern Research. Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill,
1996.Repr. from NovT 33 (1991): 347-72.
——. "Vice Catalogues as Oral-Mnemonic Cues: A Comparative Study of the Two Ways Tradition in the Didache and Parallels from the Perspective of Oral Tradition," in Jesus, the Voice, and the Text: Beyond the Oral and the Written Gospel. Edited by T.
Thatcher. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2008.
——.. "Wandering Radicalism or Purposeful Activity? Jesus and the Sending of Messengers in Mark 6:6-56." Neot 29 (1995): 187-207.
——. "Weber, Theissen, and 'Wandering Charismatics' in the Didache." JECS 6 (1998):
541-76.
, ed. The Didache in Modern Research. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Dunn, James D. G. "The Incident at Antioch (Gal. 2:11-18). JSNT 18 (1983): 3-57.
. "Jesus Tradition in Paul." Pages 155-78 in Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research. Edited by B. Chilton and C. A. Evans. NTTS 19.
Leiden: Brill, 1994.
——. The Partings of the Ways between Christianity and Judaism and their Significance for the Character of Christianity. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1991.
Dupont, Jacques. "L'Appel 4 imiter Dieu en Matthieu 5,48 et Luc 6,36." Rivista Biblica 14
(1966): 137-58.
_ Les Béatitudes. 3 vols. EBib. Rev. ed. Bruges: Abbaye de Saint-André, 1969-73.
Eberhart, Christian. Studien zur Bedeutung der Opfer im Alten Testament: die Signifikanz von Blutund Verbrennungsriten im kultischen Rahmen. WMANT 94. NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2002.
Eckstein, Hans-Joachim. "Die Weisung Jesu Christi und die Tora des Mose nach dem Matthausevangelium." Pages 379-403 in Jesus Christus als die Mitte der Schrift: Studien
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
zur Hermeneutik des Evangeliums. Edited by C. Landmesser, H.-J. Eckstein, and H.
Lichtenberger. BZNW 86. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1997.
Edgar, David H. Has God Not Chosen the Poor? The Social Setting of the Epistle of James.
JSNTSup 206. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.
Edwards, Mark J. "Ignatius and the Second Century: An Answer to R. Hiibner.' ZAC 2
(1998): 214-26.
Ehrman, Bart D. "The Didache." Pages 405-43 in The Apostolic Fathers. Vol. 1. LCL 24.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003.
Eichholz, Georg. Auslegung der Bergpredigt. 2nd ed. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1970.
Elliott, John H. "The Epistle of James in Rhetorical and Social Scientific Perspective: Holiness-Wholeness and Patterns of Replication." BTB 23 (1993): 71-81.
Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. "The Concept of Paraenesis." Pages 47-72 in Early Christian
Paraenesis in Context. Edited by J. Starr and T. Engberg-Pedersen. BZNW 125.
Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004.
Eshel, Hanan. "The Bar Kochba Revolt, 132-135." Pages 105-27 in The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. Edited by S. T. Katz. Vol. 4 of The Cambridge History of Judaism.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Esler, Philip F. "Community and Gospel in Early Christianity:
A Response to Richard Bauckham's Gospels for All Christians" SJT 51 (1998): 235-48.
—. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan
Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
——. "Making and Breaking an Agreement Mediterranean Style: A New Reading of Galatians 2:1-14." BibInt 3 (1995): 285-314.
Evans, Craig A. "Source, Form and Redaction Criticism: The "Traditional' Methods of Synoptic Interpretation." Pages 17-45 in Approaches to New Testament Study. Edited by S. E. Porter and D, Tombs. JSNTSup 120. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.
Ewherido, Anthony O. Matthew's Gospel and Judaism in the Late First Century C.E.: The Evidence from Matthew's Chapter on Parables (Matthew 13:1-52). SBL 91. New York:
Lang, 2006.
Fiedler, Peter. Das Matthdusevangelium. THKNT 1. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2006.
Finkelstein, Louis. Akiba: Scholar, Saint and Martyr. New York: Covici Friede, 1936.
, ed. Siphre ad Deuteronomium. Corpus Tannaiticum 3/2. Berlin: Jiidischer Kulturbund, 1939. Repr., New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1969.
Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1980.
Fleischer, Ezra. "On the Beginnings of Obligatory Jewish Prayer." Tarbiz 59 (1989-90):
397-441.
Flusser, David. ""Den Alten ist gesagt': Zur Interpretation der sog. Antithesen der Bergpredigt." Jud 48 (1992): 35-39,
——. "Paul's Jewish-Christian Opponents in the Didache." Pages 71-90 in Gilgul: Essays on Transformation, Revolution and Permanence in the History of Religions. Edited by S. Shaked, et al. Leiden: Brill, 1987.
——. "A Rabbinic Parallel to the Sermon on the Mount." Pages 494-508 in Judaism and the Origins of Christianity: Collected Articles. Edited by D. Flusser. Jerusalem:
Magnes, 1988.
——. "Die Tora in der Bergpredigt." Pages 102-13 in Juden und Christen lesen dieselbe
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bibel. Edited by H. Kremers. Duisburg: Braun, 1973.
Foster, Paul. Community, Law and Mission in Matthew's Gospel. WUNT 2/177. Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2004.
France, Richard T. Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher. Exeter: Paternoster, 1989.
Frankemille, Hubert. Der Brief des Jakobus. 2 vols. OTK 17/1-2. Giitersloh: Giitersloher
Verlagshaus, 1994.
——. "Das semantische Netz des Jakobusbriefes: Zur Einheit eines umstrittenen Briefes"
BZ 34 (1990): 161-97.
Freedman, David Noel, ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday,
1992.
Friedlander, Gerald. The Jewish Sources of the Sermon on the Mount. Library of Biblical
Studies. New York: Ktav, 1969.
Friedmann, Meir, ed. Seder Eliahu Rabba and Seder Eliahu Zuta. Jerusalem: Wahrmann,
1969.
Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.
Funk, Franz X. Doctrina duodecim Apostolorum: Canones Apostolorum ecclesiastici ac reliquae doctrinae de duabus viis expositiones veteres. Tabingen: Laupp, 1887.
Follesdal, Dagfinn. "Hermeneutics and the Hypothetico-Deductive Method." Pages 23345 in Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Edited by M. Martin and L. C.
McIntyre. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994.
Follesdal, Dagfinn, Lars Walloe, and Jon Elster, Argumentasjonsteori, sprak og vitenskapsfilosofi. 4th ed. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1986.
Gafni, Isaiah. "The Status of Eretz Israel in Reality and in Jewish Consciousness following the Bar-Kokhva Uprising." Pages 224-32 in The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New
Approach. Edited by A. Oppenheimer and U. Rappaport. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984.
Gager, John G. Reinventing Paul. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Gale, Aaron M. Redefining Ancient Borders: The Jewish Scribal Framework of Matthew's
Gospel. London: T&T Clark, 2005.
Gammie, John G. "Paraenetic Literature: Towards the Morphology of a Secondary Genre."
Pages 41-77 in Paraenesis: Act and Form. Edited by L. Perdue and J. G. Gammie.
Semeia 50. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
Garcia Martinez, Florentino. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English. Leiden: Brill, 1994.
Garcia Martinez, Florentino, and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1997-98.
Garleff, Gunnar. Urchristliche Identitat in Matthdusevangelium, Didache und Jakobusbrief.
Beitrage zum Verstehen der Bibel 9. Minster: LIT, 2004.
Garrow, Alan. The Gospel of Matthew's Dependence on the Didache. JSNTSup 254. London:
T&T Clark, 2004.
Gelin, Albert. The Poor of Yahweh. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1963.
Gemiinden, Petra von, Matthias Konradt, and Gerd Theifen, eds. Der Jakobusbrief:
Beitrage zur Rehabilitierung der "strohernen Epistel." Beitrage zum Verstehen der
Bibel 3. Minster: LIT, 2003.
George, Augustin. "Poverty in the Old Testament." Pages 5-18 in Gospel Poverty: Essays in Biblical Theology. Edited by A. George et al. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press,
1977.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Giet, Stanislas. L'Enigme de la Didaché. PFLUS 149. Paris: Ophrys, 1970.
Gnilka, Joachim. Das Matthdusevangelium. 2 vols. HTKNT 1. Freiburg: Herder, 1986-88.
Goldsworthy, Adrian, Roman Warfare. The Cassell History of Warfare. London: Cassell,
2000. Repr., London, Phoenix, 2007.
Good, Edwin M. Irony in the Old Testament. Sheffield: Almond, 1981.
Goodenough, Erwin R. An Introduction to Philo Judaeus. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1962.
. Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period. 13 vols. New York: Pantheon, 1953-68.
Goodman, Martin. The Ruling Class of Judaea: The Origins of the Jewish Revolt against Rome A.D. 66-70. Cambridge: University Press, 1987.
——. "Trajan and the Origins of the Bar Kokhba War." Pages 23-29 in The Bar Kokhba
War Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome.
Edited by P. Schafer. TSAJ 100. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Goppelt, Leonhard. Christentum und Judentum im ersten und zweiten Jahrhundert. BFCT
2/55. Giitersloh: Bertelsmann, 1954.
——. "Das Problem der Bergpredigt." Pages 28-43 in Christologie und Ethik. Edited by L.
Goppelt. Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968.
Graetz, Heinrich. Kritischer Commentar zu den Psalmen: Nebst Text und Ubersetzung. Breslau: Schottlaender, 1882-83.
Gregory, Andrew, and Christopher Tuckett, eds. Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Grossberg, Lawrence. "Was sind Cultural Studies?," Pages 43-83 in Widerspenstige Kulturen: Cultural Studies als Herausforderung. Edited by K. H. Hérning and R. Winter.
Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 1423. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1999.
Gruen, Erich S. "Roman Perspectives on the Jews in the Age of the Great Revolt." Pages
27-42 in The First Jewish Revolt: Archaeology, History, and Ideology. Edited by A.
Berlin and J. A. Overman. London: Routledge, 2002.
Gryglewicz, Feliks. "LEpitre de St. Jacques et I'Evangile de St. Matthieu." Roczniki Teologiczno-kanoniczne 8 (1961): 33-55.
Guelich, Robert. "The Matthean Beatitudes: "Entrance-Requirements' or Eschatological
Blessings." JBL 95 (1976): 415-34.
——. The Sermon on the Mount: A Foundation for Understanding. 2nd ed. Waco, Tex.:
Word, 1983.
Gundry, Robert H. "The Apostolically Johannine Pre-Papian Tradition concerning the Gospels of Mark and Matthew.' Pages 49-73 in The Old Is Better: New Testament
Essays in Support of Traditional Interpretations. Edited by R. H. Gundry. WUNT 178. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
——. "In Defense of the Church in Matthew as a Corpus Mixtum" ZNW 91 (2000): 15365.
——.. Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Community under Persecution. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.
——. Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.
——. "A Responsive Evaluation of the Social History of the Matthean Community in Roman Syria." Pages 62-67 in Social History of the Matthean Community: Cross-Disciplinary Approaches. Edited by D. L. Balch. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.
Gussmann, Oliver. "Das Priesterverstandnis des Flavius Josephus." Ph.D. diss., Universitat
Erlangen-Niirnberg, 2007.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Haacker, Klaus. "Feindesliebe kontra Nachstenliebe? Bemerkungen zu einer verbreiteten
Gegeniberstellung von Christentum und Judentum." Pages 47-51 in Dieses Volk schuf ich, da es meinen Ruhm verkiinde. Edited by F. Matheus. Schriftenreihe des
Forschungsschwerpunktes Geschichte und Religion des Judentums 1. Duisburg:
GEJD, 1992.
Haar Romeny, Bas ter. "Hypotheses on the Development of Judaism and Christianity in Syria in the Period after 70 C.E." Pages 13-33 in Matthew and the Didache: Two
Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt.
Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
Hadas, Moses. The Stoic Philosophy of Seneca. New York: Norton, 1958.
Hagner, Donald A. Matthew. 2 vols; WBC 33A-B. Dallas: Word, 1993-96.
. "Matthew: Apostate, Reformer, Revolutionary?" NTS 49 (2003): 193-209.
——. "Matthew: Christian Judaism or Jewish Christianity?" Pages 263-82 in The Face of New Testament Studies: A Survey of Recent Research. Edited by S. McKnight and G.
R. Osborne. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004.
Hamel, Gildas H. Poverty and Charity in Roman Palestine: First Three Centuries C.E.
University of California Publications: Near Eastern Studies 23. Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 1990.
Hands, Arthur R. Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome. London: Thames & Hudson, 1968.
Hare, Douglas R. A. "How Jewish Is the Gospel of Matthew?" CBQ 62 (2000): 264-77.
Harnack, Adolf von. Die Lehre der zwélf Apostel nebst Untersuchungen zur dltesten Geschichte der Kirchenverfassung und des Kirchenrechts. TU 2/1-2. Leipzig: Hinrichs,
1884.
Harrington, Daniel J. The Gospel of Matthew. SP 1. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical, 1991.
. "Matthew's Gospel: Pastoral Problems and Possibilities." Pages 62-73 in The Gospel of Matthew in Current Study. Edited by D. E. Aune. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Harrington, Hannah K. The Impurity Systems of Qumran and the Rabbis: Biblical Foundations. SBLDS 143. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993.
Hartin, Patrick J. "Call to Be Perfect through Suffering (James 1,2-4): The Concept of Perfection in the Epistle of James and the Sermon on the Mount." Bib 77 (1996):
477-92.
. James. SP 14. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2003.
. James and the Q Sayings of Jesus. JSNTSup 47. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.
—. "James and the Sermon on the Mount/ Plain" Pages 440-57 in SBLSP 28. Edited by D. J. Lull. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
——. "The Religious Content of the Letter of James." Pages 203-31 in Jewish Christianity
Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts. Edited by M. Jackson-McCabe.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
——.. A Spirituality of Perfection: Faith in Action in the Letter of James. Collegeville,
Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1999.
———. "'Who Is Wise and Understanding among You?' (James 3:13): An Analysis of Wisdom, Eschatology, and Apocalypticism in the Letter of James." Pages 149-68 in Conflicted Boundaries in Wisdom and Apocalypticism. Edited by B. G. Wright III and L. M. Wills. SBLSymS 35. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005.
Hartman, Lars. Into the Name of the Lord Jesus: Baptism in the Early Church. Studies of the New Testament and its World. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Harvey, A. E. "The Workman Is Worthy of His Hire: Fortunes of a Proverb in the Early
Church." NovT 24 (1982): 209-21.
Hasitschka, Martin. "Matthew and Hebrews." Pages 87-103 in Matthew and His Christian
Contemporaries. Edited by B. Repschinski and D. Sim. London: Continuum, 2008.
Hayes, Christine. Gentile Impurities and Jewish Identities: Intermarriage and Conversion from the Bible to the Talmud. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Heinemann, Isaak. Philo's griechische und jiidische Bildung: Kulturvergleichende Untersuchungen zu Philons Darstellung der jiidischen Gesetze. Breslau, 1929-32. Repr.,
Hildesheim: Olms, 1962.
Herr, Moshe D. "Ha-hellenismus vehaYehudim be-Erets Yisrael." Eshkolot NS 3-2 (197778): 20-27 [review of Hengel, Judentum und Hellenismus)}.
Hertig, Paul. "Geographical Marginality in the Matthean Journey of Jesus." Pages 472-89 in SBLSP 36. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999.
Hertzberg, Arthur. The Zionist Idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader. Repr. New York:
Atheneum, 1973.
Hezser, Catherine. The Social Structure of the Rabbinic Movement in Roman Palestine.
TSAJ 66. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997.
Higger, Michael, ed. Minor Tractates (Massekhtot Zeirot). New York 1929. Repr., Jerusalem:
Makor, 1970.
———. The Treatises Derek Erez: Masseket Derek Erez; Pirke Ben Azzai; Tosefta Derek Erez.
2 vols. New York 1935. Repr., Jerusalem: Makor, 1970.
Hirsch-Luipold, Rainer, et al. Die Bildtafel des Kebes: Allegorie des Lebens. SAPERE 8.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2004.
Hirshman, Marc. "Rabbinic Universalism in the Second and Third Centuries." HTR 93
(2000): 101-15.
Hock, Ronald F. "The Workshop as a Social Setting for Paul's Missionary Preaching." CBQ
14 (1979): 439-50.
Hoppe, Rudolf. Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes. 2nd ed. FB 28. Wiirzburg:
Echter, 1985, ——. "Vollkommenheit bei Matthaus als theologische Aussage." Pages 141-64 in Salz der Erde-Licht der Welt: Exegetische Studien zum Matthdusevangelium. Edited by L.
Oberlinner and P. Fiedler. Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1991.
Hiibner, Reinhard M. "Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben Briefe des Ignatius von Antiochien." ZAC 1 (1997): 44-72.
Hummel, Reinhart. Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kirche und Judentum im Matthdusevangelium. 2nd ed. BEvT 33. Miinchen: Kaiser, 1966.
Hurd, John C. The Origin of 1 Corinthians. 2nd ed. Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press,
1983.
Ilan, Tal. "The Attraction of Aristocratic Women to Pharisaism During the Second Temple
Period." HTR 88 (1995): 1-33.
Isaac, Benjamin, and Aharon Oppenheimer. "The Revolt of Bar Kokhba: Ideology and Modern Scholarship." JJS 36 (1985): 33-60.
Jackson-McCabe, Matt. Logos and Law in the Letter of James: The Law of Nature, the Law of Moses, and the Law of Freedom. NovTSup 100. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
——. "The Messiah Jesus in the Mythic World of James?" JBL 122 (2003): 701-30.
——_ "What's in a Name? The Problem of 'Jewish Christianity?" Pages 7-38 in Jewish
Christianity Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts. Edited by M. Jack-
BIBLIOGRAPHY
son-McCabe. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
, ed. Jewish Christianity Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
Jaffé, Dan. Le judaisme et lavénement du christianisme: Orthodoxie et hétérodoxie dans la littérature talmudique Ier-IIe siécle. Patrimoines: Judaisme. Paris: Cerf, 2005.
Jaubert, Annie. "Jésus et le calendrier de Qumran, NTS 7 (1960/61): 1-30.
Jefford, Clayton N. "The Milieu of Matthew, the Didache, and Ignatius of Antioch: Agreements and Differences." Pages 35-47 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van
Gorcum, 2005.
——.. The Sayings of Jesus in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. VCSup 11. Leiden: Brill,
1989.
——. "Social Locators as a Bridge between the Didache and Matthew." Pages 245-64 in Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers. Edited by Andrew
Gregory and Christopher Tuckett. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
——, ed. The Didache in Context. Essays on Its Text, History and Transmission. NovTSup
77. Leiden: Brill, 1995.
Johnson, Luke T. The Letter of James. AB 37A. New York: Doubleday, 1995.
. "The Use of Leviticus 19 in the Letter of James." JBL 101 (1982): 391-401.
Johnson, Luke T., and Wesley Wachob. "The Sayings of Jesus in the Letter of James." Pages
431-50 in Authenticating the Words of Jesus. Edited by B. Chilton and C. A. Evans.
NTTS 28/1. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Repr. as pages 136-54 in Johnson, Brother of Jesus,
Friend of God: Studies in the Letter of James. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.
Jonge, Marinus de. "The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the "Two Ways." Pages
179-94 in Biblical Traditions in Transmission. JSJSup 111. Edited by C. Hempel and J. M. Lieu. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
Jonge, Marinus de, and Johannes Tromp. "Jacob's Son Levi in the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and Related Literature." Pages 203-36 in Biblical Figures Outside the Bible.
Edited by M. E. Stone and T. A. Bergen. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International,
1998.
Jonsson, Jakob. Humour and Irony in the New Testament: Illuminated by Parallels in Talmud and Midrash. BZRGG 28. Leiden: Brill, 1985.
Kaestli, Jean-Daniel. "Ou en est le débat sur le judéo-christianisme?" Pages 243-72 in Le déchirement: Juifs et chrétiens au premier siecle. Edited by D, Marguerat. MdB 32.
Genéve: Labor et Fides, 1996.
Kaiser, Sigurd. Krankenheilung: Untersuchungen zu Form, Sprache, traditionsgeschichtlichem Hintergrund und Aussage von Jak 5, 13-18. WMANT 112. Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 2006.
Karrer, Martin. Jesus Christus im Neuen Testament. GNT 11. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1998.
Katz, Steven T. ed. The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. Vol. 4 of The Cambridge History of Judaism. Edited by W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Kazen, Thomas. Jesus and Purity Halakha: Was Jesus Indifferent to Impurity? ConBNT 38.
Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2002.
Keck, Leander, E. "Ethics in the Gospel according to Matthew." The Iliff Review 41 (1984):
39-56.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Keener, Craig $. A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.
Kehrer, Giinther. "Definitionen der Religion." Pages 418-25 in vol 4 of Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe. Edited by H. Cancik and B. Gladigow and M.
Laubscher. 5 vols. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1988-2001.
Keith, P. "La citation de Lv 19,18b en Jc 2,1-13." Pages 227-47 in The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition. Edited by J. Schlosser. BETL 176. Leuven: Peeters, 2004.
Kellermann, Ulrich. "Der Dekalog in den Schriften des Friihjudentums: Ein Uberblick."
Pages 147-226 in Weisheit, Ethos und Gebot: Weisheitsund Dekalogtraditionen in der Bibel und im friihen Judentum. Edited by H. G. Reventlow. Biblisch-theologische
Studien 43. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2001.
Kelly, Francis X. "Poor and Rich in the Epistle of James." Ph.D. diss., Temple University,
1973.
Kennard, J. Spencer. "The Place of Origin of Matthew's Gospel." ATR 31 (1949): 243-46.
Kilpatrick, George D. The Origins of the Gospel according to St. Matthew. Oxford: Clarendon, 1946.
Kimbrough, S. T. "A Non-Weberian Sociological Approach to Israelite Religion." JNES 31
(1972) 195-202.
Kinzig, Wolfram. "The Nazoraeans." Pages 463-87 in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries. Edited by O. Skarsaune and R. Hvalvik. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2007.
Kittel, Gerhard. "Der geschichtliche Ort des Jakobusbriefes." ZNW 41 (1942): 71-105.
Kittel, Gerhard, and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.
Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-1976.
Klassen, William. Love of Enemies: The Way to Peace. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.
Klauck, Hans-Josef. Die religidse Umwelt des Urchristentums. 2 vols. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995-1996,
Klawans, Jonathan. Impurity and Sin in Ancient Judaism. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2000.
. "Notions of Gentile Impurity in Ancient Judaism." AJSR 20 (1995): 285-312.
Klein, Gottlieb. Der dilteste christliche Katechismus und die jiidische PropagandaLiteratur.
Berlin, 1909.
Klein, Martin. "Ein vollkommenes Werk": Vollkommenheit, Gesetz und Gericht als theologische Themen des Jakobusbriefes. BWANT 139. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995.
Klijn, Albertus F, J., trans. "2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch." Pages 615-52 in vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday, 1983.
. Jewish-Christian Gospel Tradition. VCSup 17. Leiden: Brill, 1992.
Klijn, Albertus EJ. and Gerrit J. Reinink, eds., Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects.
NovTSup 36. Leiden: Brill, 1973.
Klinghardt, Matthias. Gemeinschaftsmahl und Mahlgemeinschaft: Soziologie und Liturgie friihchristlicher Mahlfeiern. TANZ 13. Tabingen: Francke, 1996.
Klink, Edward W. "The Gospel Community Debate: State of the Question." Currents in Biblical Research 3 (2004): 60-85.
Kloner, Amos. "Hideout-Complexes from the Period of Bar-Kokhva in the Judean Plain"
Pages 153-71 in The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New Approach. Edited by A. Oppenheimer and U. Rappaport. Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984.
Kloner, Amos and Boas Zissu. "Hiding Complexes in Judaea: An Archaeological and Geographical Update on the Area of the Bar Kokhba Revolt." Pages 181-216 in The
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. Edited by P. Schafer. TSAJ 100. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Kloppenborg, John S. "Didache 1.1-6.1: James, Matthew, and the Torah" Pages 193-221 in Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers, Edited by Andrew
Gregory and Christopher Tuckett. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
——. "Didache 16,6-8 and Special Matthean Tradition." ZNW 70 (1979): 54-67.
——. "Emulation of the Jesus Tradition in James." Pages 121-50 in Reading James with New Eyes. Edited by R. L. Webb and J. S. Kloppenborg. Library of New Testament
Studies 342. London: T&T Clark, 2007.
——.. "The Growth and Impact of Agricultural Tenancy in Jewish Palestine (III BcE-I
cE)." JESHO 51 (2008): 33-60.
———.. "Patronage Avoidance in the Epistle of James." HvTSt 55 (1999): 755-94.
——. "The Reception of the Jesus Traditions in James." Pages 93-141 in The Catholic
Epistles and the Tradition. Edited by J. Schlosser. BETL 176. Leuven: Peeters, 2004.
——. "The Transformation of Moral Exhortation in Didache 1-5." Pages 88-109 in The Didache in Context: Essays on Its Text, History and Transmission. Edited by C. N.
Jefford. NovTSup 77. Leiden: Brill, 1995.
——. "The Use of the Synoptics or Q in Did. 1:3b-2:1." Pages 105-29 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
Klostermann, Erich. Das Matthdusevangelium. 4th ed. HNT. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1971.
Konradt, Matthias. Christliche Existenz nach dem Jakobusbrief: Eine Studie zu seiner soteriologischen und ethischen Konzeption. SUNT 22. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1998.
——. "*... damit ihr Séhne eures Vaters im Himmel werdet': Erwagungen zur 'Logik' von
Gewaltverzicht und Feindesliebe in Mt 5,38-48." Pages 70-92 in Gewalt wahrnehmen — von Gewalt heilen: Theologische und religionswissenschaftliche Perspektiven.
Edited by W. Dietrich and W. Lienemann. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2004.
——. Israel, Kirche und die Vélker im Matthdusevangelium. WUNT 215. Tubingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2007.
——. "Der Jakobusbrief als Brief des Jakobus: Erwagungen zum historischen Kontext des
Jakobusbriefes im Lichte der traditionsgeschichtlichen Beziehungen zum 1. Petrusbrief und zum Hintergrund der Autorfiktion." Pages 16-53 in Der Jakobusbrief:
Beitrége zur Rehabilitierung der "strohernen Epistel." Edited by P. von Gemiinden, M.
Konradt and G. Theifen. Beitrage zum Verstehen der Bibel 3. Minster: Lit, 2003.
—_ . "Der Jakobusbrief im friihchristlichen Kontext: Uberlegungen zum traditionsgeschichtlichen Verhaltnis des Jakobusbriefes zur Jesusiiberlieferung, zur paulinischen
Tradition und zum 1.Petrusbrief." Pages 171-212 in The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition. Edited by J. Schlosser. BETL 176. Leuven: Peeters, 2004.
———.. "Menschenoder Bruderliebe? Beobachtungen zum Liebesgebot in den Testamenten der Zwélf Patriarchen," ZNW
88 (1997): 296-310.
—_—.. "Die vollkommene Erfiillung der Tora und der Konflikt mit den Pharisaern im
Matthausevangelium." Pages 129-52 in Das Gesetz im friihen Judentum und im Neuen Testament. Edited by D. Sanger, M. Konradt, and C. Burchard. NTOA/SUNT
57. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006.
Kosmala, Hans. "Nachfolge und Nachahmung Gottes, II. Im Jiidischen Denken." Pages
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
138-231 in vol. 2 of Studies, Essays and Reviews. New Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1978.
Kraft, Heinrich. "Die Anfange des geistliches Amtes." TLZ 100 (1975): 81-98.
Krauss, Samuel, and William Horbury, eds. The Jewish-Christian Controversy from the Earliest Times to 1789. TSAJ 56. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995.
Kretschmar, Georg. "Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Ursprung friihchristlicher Askese."
ZTK 61 (1964): 27-67.
Kuhn, HeinzWolfgang. "Das Liebesgebot Jesu als Tora und als Evangelium: Zur Feindesliebe und zur christlichen und jiidischen Auslegung der Bergpredigt." Pages
194-230 in Vom Urchristentum zu Jesus. Edited by H. Frankemélle, K. Kertelge and J. Gnilka. Freiburg: Herder, 1989.
Kiimmel, Werner G. "Aufere und innere Reinheit des Menschen bei Jesus." Pages 117-29 in Heilsgeschehen und Geschichte: Gesammelte Aufsdtze. Edited by E. Grasser and O.
Merk. 2 vols. Marburger Theologische Studien 16. Marburg: Elwert, 1965.
. 'Jesus und der jiidische Traditionsgedanke." ZNW 33 (1934): 105-30.
Kiinzel, Georg. Studien zum Gemeindeverstdandnis des Matthdus-Evangeliums. Calwer Theologische Monographien A/10. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1978.
Kiirzinger, Joseph. Papias von Hierapolis und die Evangelien des Neuen Testaments. Eichstatter Materialien 4. Regensburg: Pustet, 1983.
Kuschke, Anton. "Arm und Reich im Alten Testament mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der nachexilischen Zeit"? ZAW 57 (1939) 31-57.
Lambrecht, Jan. The Sermon on the Mount: Proclamation and Exhortation. Good News
Studies 14. Wilmington, Del.: Glazier, 1985.
Laws, Sophie. A Commentary on the Epistle of James. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.
. "The Doctrinal Basis for the Ethics of James." Pages 299-305 in Studia Evangelica.
Vol. 7. Papers Presented to the Fifth International Congress on Biblical Studies Held at Oxford, 1973. Berlin: AkademieVerlag, 1982.
. "Epistle of James." ABD 3:621-28.
Layton, Bentley. "The Sources, Date and Transmission of Didache 1.3b-2.1." HTR 61
(1968): 343-83.
Lechner, Thomas. Ignatius Adversus Valentinianos? Chronologische und theologie-geschichtliche Studien zu den Briefen des Ignatius von Antiochen. VC: Supplement Series 47.
Leiden: Brill, 1999, Lerner, Myron B. "The External Tractates." Pages 367-404 in The Literature of the Sages.
Edited by S. Safrai. CRINT 2/3a. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1987.
Levine, Lee I. The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years. New Haven, Conn.: Yale
University Press, 2000.
——. The Rabbinic Class of Roman Palestine in Late Antiquity. Jerusalem: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1989.
Levison, John R. "A Better Righteousness: The Character and Purpose of Matthew 5;2148." Studia Biblica et Theologica 12 (1982): 171-94.
Liddell, Henry G., Robert Scott, Henry Stuart Jones, and Roderick McKenzie. A Lexicon:
With a Revised Supplement. 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1996, Lilje, Hanns. Die Lehre der zwélf Apostel: Eine Kirchenordnung des ersten christlichen
Jahrhunderts. Die urchristliche Botschaft 28, Hamburg: Furche, 1956.
Lindemann, Andreas. "Antwort auf die Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben
Briefe des Ignatius von Antiochien." ZAC 1 (1997): 185-94.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Review of T. Lechner, Ignatius Adversus Valentinianos? Chronologische und theologiegeschichtliche Studien zu den Briefen des Ignatius von Antiochen. ZAC 6 (2002):
157-61.
Loeb, Isidore. "Les dix-huit bénédictions." RE] 19 (1889) 17-40.
. "La littérature des pauvres dans la Bible." REJ 20 (1890): 161-98; 21 (1891): 1-42.
Lohfink, Gerhard. "Von der 'Anawim-Partei' zur 'Kirche der Armen': Die bibelwissenschaftliche Ahnentafel eines Hauptbegriffs der 'Theologie der Befreiung." Bib 67
(1986): 153-76.
Lohr, Hermut. "Jesus und der Nomos aus der Sicht des entstehenden Christentums: Zum
Jesus-Bild im ersten Jahrhundert n. Chr. und zu unserem Jesus-Bild." Pages 337-54 in Der historische Jesus: Tendenzen und Perspektiven der gegenwartigen Forschung.
Edited by J. Schréter and R. Brucker. BZNW 114. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002.
Lohse, Eduard. "Ich aber sage euch." Pages 189-203 in Der Ruf Jesu und die Antwort der
Gemeinde. Exegetische Untersuchungen. Edited by E. Lohse, C. Burchard, and B.
Schaller. Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970.
Loopik, Marcus van. The Ways of the Sages and the Way of the World. TSAJ 26. Tubingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1991 Louw Johannes P., and Eugene A. Nida, eds. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
Based on Semantic Domains. 2 vols. 2nd ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1989.
Ludwig, Martina. Wort als Gesetz: Eine Untersuchung zum Verstdndnis von "Wort" und
"Gesetz" in israelitisch-friihjiidischen und neutestamentlichen Schriften: Gleichzeitig ein Beitrag zur Theologie des Jakobusbriefes. Europaische Hochschulschriften, Reihe
23, Theologie 502. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1994.
Lihrmann, Dieter. "Liebet eure Feinde (Lk 6,27-36; Mt 5,39-48)." ZTK 69 (1972): 41238.
Luomanen, Petri. "Corpus Mixtum: An Appropriate Description of Matthew's Community?" JBL 117 (1998): 469-80.
. Entering the Kingdom of Heaven: A Study on the Structure of Matthew's View of Salvation. WUNT 2/101. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.
——. "Where Did Another Rich Man Come From? The Jewish-Christian Profile of the Story about a Rich Man in the 'Gospel of the Hebrews' (Origen, Comm. in Matth.
15.14)." VC 57 (2003): 243-75.
Luz, Ulrich. Das Evangelium nach Matthdus. 4 vols. EKKNT 1/1-4. Diisseldorf and Zitrich:
Benziger and Neukirchener, 1985-2002 = Matthew. 3 vols. Hermeneia. Minneapolis:
Fortress, 2005-2007.
—_—.. "The Fulfilment of the Law in Matthew (Matt. 5:17-20)." Pages 185-218 in Studies in Matthew. Translated by Rosemary Selle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. Repr. from "Die Erfiillung des Gesetzes bei Matthaus (Mt 5,17-20)." ZTK 75 (1978): 398-435.
. Matthew 1-7: A Commentary. Trans. W. C. Linss. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989.
———. Matthew in History: Interpretation, Influence, and Effects. Minneapolis: Fortress,
1994.
——. "Die Theologie des Jakobusbriefes." ZTK 81 (1984): 1-30.
—— . "Uberlegungen zum Verhiltnis zwischen Liebe zu Gott und Liebe zum Nachsten (Mt 22,34-40)." Pages 135-48 in Der lebendige Gott: Studien zur Theologie des Neuen
Testaments. Edited by T. Séding. Miinster: Aschendorff, 1996.
MacMullen, Ramsay. Christianity and Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries. New
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Haven, Conn..: Yale University Press, 1997.
——. Christianizing the Roman Empire (A.D. 100-400). New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1984.
Maier, Johann. Studien zur jiidischen Bibel und ihrer Geschichte. SJ 28. Berlin: de Gruyter,
2004.
Malherbe, Abraham J. Ancient Epistolary Theorists. SBLSBS 19. Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1988.
. "Hellenistic Moralists and the New Testament." ANRW 26.1:267-333.
Malina, Bruce J. The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural Anthropology. 3rd ed.
Revised and expanded. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2001.
Malina, Bruce J., and L. Rohbaugh, Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels.
2nd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003.
Manns, Frédéric. L'Israel de Dieu. Essais sur le christianisme primitif. Studium Biblicum
Franciscanum Analecta 42. Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press, 1996.
. Le Judéo-christianisme, mémoire ou prophétie? ThH 112. Paris: Beauchesne, 2000.
Mansoor, Menahem. The Thanksgiving Hymns: Translated and Annotated with an Introduction. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1961.
Martin, Ralph P. James. WBC 48. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988.
Martin, Raymond A. James. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1982.
Marxsen, Willi. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by G. Buswell. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1968.
Massebieau, Louis. "LEpitre de Jacques est-elle foeuvre d'un Chrétien?" RHR 32 (1895):
249-83.
Mathys, Hans-Peter. Liebe deinen Nachsten wie dich selbst: Untersuchungen zum alttestamentlichen Gebot der Nachstenliebe (Lev 19,18). OBO 71. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1986.
Mayor, Joseph B. The Epistle of St. James: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Comments. 3rd ed. London: MacMillan, 1910. Repr., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1954.
McCown, Chester C. "The Beatitudes in the Light of Ancient Ideals." JBL 46 (1927): 5061.
McKnight, Scot. "A Parting Within the Way: Jesus and James on Israel and Purity." Pages
82-129 in James the Just and Christian Origins. Edited by B. Chilton and C. A.
Evans. NovTSup 98. Leiden: Brill, 1999.
Meier, John P. "Antioch." Pages 12-86 in Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles of Catholic Christianity. Edited by R. E. Brown and J. P. Meier. New York: Paulist, 1983.
. Law and History in Matthew's Gospel: A Redactional Study of Mt. 5:17-48. AnBib
71. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1976.
. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. ABRL. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Meiser, Martin. "Vollkommenheit in Qumran und im Matthausevangelium." Pages 195209 in Kirche und Volk Gottes. Edited by M. Karrer, W. Kraus, O. Merk and J. Roloff.
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2000.
Meisinger, Hubert. Liebesgebot und Altruismusforschung: Ein exegetischer Beitrag zum
Dialog zwischen Theologie und Naturwissenschaft. NTOA 33. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996.
Menken, Maarten J. J. Matthew's Bible: The Old Testament Text of the Evangelist. BETL 173.
Leuven: Peeters, 2004.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Merklein, Helmut. Die Gottesherrschaft als Handlungsprinzip: Untersuchung zur Ethik Jesu.
2nd ed. FB 33. Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1981.
Milavec, Aaron. The Didache: Faith, Hope, and Life of the Earliest Christian Communities,
50-70 C.E. New York: Newman, 2003.
——. "Synoptic Tradition in the Didache Revisited." JECS 11 (2003): 443-80.
——. "When, Why, and for Whom Was the Didache Created? Insights into the Social and Historical Setting of the Didache Communities." Pages 63-84 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus, 1-16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary.
AB 3. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1991.
Millar, Fergus G. B. "Transformations of Judaism under Graeco-Roman Rule: Responses to Seth Schwartz's Imperialism and Jewish Society (2001)." JJS 57 (2006): 139-58.
Mimouni, Simon C. Le judéo-christianisme ancien: Essais historiques. Paris: Cerf, 1998.
. "Pour une définition nouvelle du judéo-christianisme ancien." NTS 38 (1992):
161-86.
Mitchell, Margaret. "Patristic Counter-Evidence to the Claim that 'The Gospels Were Written for All Christians," NTS 51 (2005): 36-79.
Mitchell, Nathan. "Baptism in the Didache." Pages 226-55 in The Didache in Context:
Essays on its Text, History, and Transmission. Edited by C. N. Jefford. NovTSup 77.
Leiden: Brill, 1995.
Mitternacht, Dieter. "Foolish Galatians? A Recipient-Oriented Assessment of Paul's Letter."
Pages 408-33 in The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation. Edited by Mark D. Nanos. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson,
2002.
Montefiore, Claude G. Rabbinic Literature and Gospel Teachings. London: MacMillan,
1930. Repr., New York: Ktav, 1970.
Moo, Douglas J. The Epistle of James: An Introduction and Commentary. TNTC. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985.
Moore, George F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim. 3 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1927-30.
Muecke, Douglas C. The Compass of Irony. London: Methuen, 1969.
Miiller, Hans-Peter. Sozialstruktur und Lebensstile: Der neuere theoretische Diskurs tiber soziale Ungleichheit. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1992.
Murphy, Catherine M. Wealth in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Qumran Community. Studies in the Texts of the Desert of Judah 40. Leiden: Brill, 2002.
Murray, Michele. Playing a Jewish Game: Gentile Christian Judaizing in the First and Second
Centuries CE. Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2004.
Mussner, Franz. Die Kraft der Wurzel: Judentum - Jesus - Kirche. Freiburg: Herder, 1987.
. "Die Tauflehre des Jakobusbriefs." Pages 61-67 in Zeichen des Glaubens: Studien zu Taufe und Firmung. Edited by H. Auf Der Maur and B. Kleinheyer. Freiburg:
Herder, 1972.
Nanos, Mark D. The Irony of Galatians: Paul's Letter in First Century Context. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 2001.
—_. The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul's Letter. Minneapolis: Fortress,
1996.
———. "What Was at Stake in Peter's 'Eating with Gentiles' at Antioch?" Pages 282-318 in
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation. Edited by Mark D. Nanos. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2002.
Nepper-Christensen, Poul. "Die Taufe im Matthausevangelium." NTS 31 (1985): 198-207.
Neusner, Jacob. Development of a Legend: Studies on the Traditions Concerning Yohanan ben Zakkai. StPB 16. Leiden: Brill, 1970.
—.. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus: The Tradition and the Man. 2 vols. SJLA 3-4. Leiden: Brill,
1973.
——. "The Fellowship (713N) of the Second Jewish Commonwealth." HTR 53 (1960):
125-42.
——. "The Formation of Rabbinic Judaism: Yavneh from A.D. 70-100" ANRW 19.2:3-42.
——. The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism. SJLA. Leiden: Brill, 1973.
——. A Life of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai c. 1-80 C.E. StPB 6. 2nd ed. Leiden: Brill,
1970.
Nickelsburg, George W. E. "Riches, the Rich, and God's Judgment in 1 Enoch 92-105 and the Gospel According to Luke." Pages 521-46 in George W.E. Nickelsburg in Perspective: An Ongoing Dialogue of Learning. Edited by J. Neusner and A. J. Avery-Peck.
JSJSup 80. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
Niebuhr, Karl-Wilhelm. "Die Antithesen des Matthaus: Jesus als Toralehrer und die friihjiidische weisheitlich gepragte Torarezeption." Pages 175-200 in Gedenkt an das
Wort. Edited by C. Kahler, M. Bohm and C. Bottrich. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1999,
———. Gesetz und Pariinese: Katechismusartige Weisungsreihen in der friihjtidischen Literatur. WUNT 2/28. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987.
Niederwimmer, Kurt. Die Didache. Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vatern 1. Géttingen
1989, ——.. The Didache: A Commentary. Edited by H. W. Attridge. Translation by Linda M.
Maloney. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998.
——. "Der Didachist und seine Quellen." Pages 15-36 in The Didache in Context: Essays on Its Text, History and Transmission, Edited by C. N. Jefford. NovTSup 77. Leiden:
Brill, 1995.
——. "An Examination of the Development of Itinerant Radicalism in the Environment and Tradition of the Didache." Pages 321-39 in The Didache in Modern Research.
Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Nolland, John L. The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. NIGTC. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.
Novakovic, Lidija. Messiah, Healer of the Sick: A Study of Jesus as the Son of David in the Gospel of Matthew. WUNT 2/170. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Oppenheimer, Aharon. The 'Am Ha-Aretz: A Study in the Social History of the Jewish People in the Hellenistic-Roman Period. ALGHJ 8. Leiden: Brill, 1977.
——. "Bar-Kokhva and the Practice of Jewish Law." Pages 140-46 in The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New Approach. Edited by A. Oppenheimer and U. Rappaport. Jerusalem:
Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984.
- Review of P. Schafer, Der Bar Kokhba Aufstand : Studien zum zweiten jiidischen
Krieg gegen Rom, JS] 14 (1983): 217-20.
, ed. The Bar-Kokhva Revolt. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 1980 (Hebrew).
Oppenheimer, Aharon, and Uriel Rappaport, eds. The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New Approach,
Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984 (Hebrew).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Osborne, Robert E. "The Provenance of Matthew's Gospel." SR 3 (1973): 220-35.
Overman, J. Andrew. "The First Revolt and Flavian Politics." Pages 213-20 in The First
Jewish Revolt: Achaeology, History, and Ideology. Edited by A. M. Berlin and J. A.
Overman, London: Routledge, 2002.
——. Igreja e Comunidade em Crise: O Evangelho Segundo Mateus. Sao Paulo: Paulinas,
1996, ———. Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism: The Social World of the Matthean Community. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.
Overman, J. Andrew, and William S. Green, "Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period," ABD
3:1137-54.
Overman, J. Andrew, and Robert S. MacLennan, eds. Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of and in Dialogue with A. Thomas Kraabel. South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 41. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992.
Paschen, Wilfried. Rein und Unrein: Untersuchung zur biblischen Wortgeschichte. SANT 24.
Minchen: K6sel, 1970.
Patte, Daniel. The Gospel according to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's
Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.
Penner, Todd C. The Epistle of James and Eschatology: Re-reading an Ancient Christian
Letter. JSNTSup 121. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996.
Percy, Ernst. Die Botschaft Jesu: Eine traditionskritische und exegetische Untersuchung. LUA
NS 49. Lund: Gleerup, 1953.
Perdue, Leo, "Paraenesis and the Epistle of James." ZNW 72 (1981): 241-56.
. "The Social Character of Paraenesis and Paraenetic Literature." Pages 5-39 in Paraenesis: Act and Form. Edited by L. Perdue and J. G. Gammie. Semeia 50. Atlanta:
Scholars Press, 1990.
Perdue, L., and J. G. Gammie, eds. Paraenesis: Act and Form. Semeia 50. Atlanta: Scholars
Press, 1990.
Piper, John. 'Love Your Enemies': Jesus' love Command in the Synoptic Gospels and in the Early Christian Paraenesis: A History of the Tradition and Interpretation of Its Uses.
SNTSMS 38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.
Pleins, J. David. "Poor, Poverty." ABD 5:402-14.
Popkes, Wiard. Adressaten, Situation und Form des Jakobusbriefes. SBS 125/126. Stuttgart:
Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1986.
. Der Brief des Jakobus. THKNT 14. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2001.
——.. "James and Paraenesis Reconsidered." Pages 535-61 in Texts and Contexts: Biblical
Texts in their Textual and Situational Contexts. Edited by T. Fornberg and D. Hellholm. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995.
——.. "Paraenesis in the New Testament: An Exercise in Conceptuality." Pages 13-46 in Early Christian Paraenesis in Context. Edited by J. Starr and T. EngbergPedersen.
BZNW 125. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004.
——. "Tradition und Traditionsbriiche im Jakobusbrief? Pages 143-70 in The Catholic
Epistles and the Tradition. Edited by J. Schlosser. BETL 176. Leuven: Peeters, 2004.
Porter, Stanley. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. Biblical Languages: Greek 2. Sheffield:
JSOT Press, 1992.
. "Is dipsychos (James 1:8; 4:8) a 'Christian' Word?" Bib 71 (1990): 469-98.
Porter, Virgil V. "The Sermon on the Mount in the Book of James: Part 1" BSac 162 (2005):
344-60.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Prostmeier, Ferdinand R. Der Barnabasbrief, iibersetzt und erkldrt. Kommentar zu den
Apostolischen Vatern 8. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999.
Rahlfs, Alfred. 'ani und 'inaw in den Psalmen. Gottingen: Dieterich, 1892.
Reinbold, Wolfgang. "Matthaus und das Gesetz: Zwei neue Studien." BZ 50 (2006): 24450.
Repschinski, Boris. The Controversy Stories in the Gospel of Matthew: Their Redaction,
Form, and Relevance for the Relationship between the Matthean Community and Formative Judaism. FRLANT 189. Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000.
—_—.. "'For He Will Save His People from Their Sins' (Matt 1:21): A Christology for Christian Jews." CBQ 68 (2006): 248-67.
——. "Matthew and Luke." Pages 50-65 in Matthew and His Christian Contemporaries.
Edited by D. Sim and B. Repschinski. LNTS 333. London: Continuum, 2008.
——. "Re-Imagining the Presence of God: The Temple and the Messiah in the Gospel of Matthew.' ABR 54 (2006): 37-49.
Reventlow, Henning Graf, and Axel Graupner, eds. Weisheit, Ethos und Gebot: Weisheitsund Dekalogtraditionen in der Bibel und im friihen Judentum. Biblisch-theologische
Studien 43. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2001.
Reydams-Schils, Gretchen J. The Roman Stoics: Self, Responsibility, and Affection. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Riches, John K. Conflicting Mythologies: Identity Formation in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew. Studies of the New Testament and Its World. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000.
. Jesus and the Transformation of Judaism. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1980.
Riches, John K. and David C. Sim, eds., The Gospel of Matthew in Its Roman Imperial Context. JSNTSup 276. London: T&T Clark, 2005.
Robinson, James M., Paul Hoffmann, and John S. Kloppenborg, eds., The Critical Edition of Q: A Synopsis, Including the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mark and Thomas, with English, German and French Translations of Q and Thomas. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000.
Roloff, Jiirgen. Der erste Brief an Timotheus. EKKNT 15. Ziirich: Benziger, 1988.
Ropes, James H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of St. James. ICC.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1916.
Rordorf, Willy. "An Aspect of the Judeo-Christian Ethic: The Two Ways." Pages 148-64 in The Didache in Modern Research. Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill,
1996, ——. "Does the Didache Contain Jesus Tradition Independently of the Synoptic
Gospels?" Pages 394-423 in Jesus and the Oral Gospel Tradition. Edited by H. Wansbrough. JSNTSup 64. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.
——. "Baptism according to the Didache." Pages 212-22 in The Didache in Modern Research, Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Rordorf, Willy, and André Tuilier. La Doctrine des Douze Apétres (Didaché). 2nd ed. SC
248 bis. Paris: Cerf, 1998.
Rosenfeld, Ben-Zion, and Joseph Menirav. Markets and Marketing in Roman Palestine.
JSJSup 99. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Rosivach, Vincent J. "Class Matters in the «—Dyskolos» of Menander" Classical Quarterly 51
(2001): 127-34.
——. "Some Athenian Presuppositions About 'The Poor.'" Greece & Rome 38 (1991):
189-98.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Rouwhorst, Gerard. "Didache 9-10: A Litmus Test for the Research on Early Christian
Liturgy Eucharist." Pages 143-56 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum,
2005.
Ruzer, Serge. "The Technique of composite Citation in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt
5:21-22, 33-37)." RB 103 (1996): 65-75.
Sanger, Dieter. "Tora fiir die Volker - Weisungen der Liebe: Zur Rezeption des Dekalogs im frihen Judentum und Neuen Testament." Pages 97-146 in Weisheit, Ethos und
Gebot: Weisheitsund Dekalogtraditionen in der Bibel und im friihen Judentum.
Edited by Henning Graf Reventlow. Biblisch-theologische Studien 43. NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2001.
Safrai, Shmuel. "Allon, Gedalya." Pages 654-55 in vol. 2 of Encyclopaedia Judaica. Edited by C. Roth and G. Wigoder. 16 vols. Jerusalem: Keter, 1972.
——. "Further Observations on the Problem of the Status and Activities of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai after the Destruction [of the Temple]." Pages 203-26 in Sefer zikkaron le-Gedalyahu Alon. Edited by M. Dorman, Shmuel Safrai, and Menahem
Stern. Tel-Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1970 (Hebrew). Repr. pages 341-64 in vol. 2 of In Times of Temple and Mishnah. Edited by S. Safrai. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1994.
——. "Gathering in the Synagogues on Festivals, Sabbaths and Weekdays." Pages 7-15 in Ancient Synagogues in Israel: Third-Seventh Century C.E.. Edited by Rachel Hachlili.
BAR International Series 499. Oxford: B.A.R., 1989.
——. "Hasidim we-Anshei Maase." Zion 50 (1984-85): 133-54.
. In Times of Temple and Mishnah: Studies in Jewish History. Collected Studies.
(Hebrew). 2 vols. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1994. Repr. 1996.
——. "Jesus and the Hasidic Movement" (Hebrew). Pages 413-36 in The Jews in the Hellenistic-Roman World: Studies in Memory of Menahem Stern. Edited by I. M. Gafni,
A. Oppenheimer and D. R. Schwartz. Jerusalem: Graphit Press, 1996.
——. "Jesus and the Hasidim." Jerusalem Perspective 42-44 (1994): 3-22.
——. "Martyrdom in the Teachings of the Tannaim." Pages 145-64 in Sjaloom. Ter nagedachtenis van Mgr. Dr. A.C. Ramselaar. Edited by Th.C. de Kruijf and H. van de
Sandt. Arnhem: Folkertsma Stichting voor Talmudica, 1983. Repr. in pages 406-20 in vol. 2 of In Times of Temple and Mishnah. Edited by S. Safrai.
——. "Teaching of Pietists in Mishnaic Literature." JJS 16 (1965): 15-33.
——. "The Travels of the Sages of Yavne to Rome." Pages 151-61 in Sefer zikkaron liShlomo Navon. Edited by Ruben Bonfil et al. Jerusalem: Mosad Shlomo Meir /
Mosad Raphael Cantoni, 1978 (Hebrew). Repr. pages 365-81 in vol. 2 of In Times of Temple and Mishnah. Edited by S. Safrai.
Safrai, Zeev. "The Bar-Kokhva Revolt and Its Effects on Settlement." Pages 182-214 in The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New Approach. Edited by A. Oppenheimer and U. Rappaport.
Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984.
Saldarini, Anthony J. "The Gospel of Matthew and Jewish-Christian Conflict in the Galilee" Pages 23-38 in The Galilee in Late Antiquity. Edited by L. I. Levine. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992.
———. Matthew's Christian-Jewish Community. CSH]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
—_—. Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society: A Sociological Approach.
Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1988.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Sand, Alexander. Das Evangelium nach Matthdus. RNT. Regensburg: Pustet, 1986.
. Das Gesetz und die Propheten: Untersuchung zur Theologie des Evangeliums nach Matthdus. Biblische Untersuchungen 11. Regensburg: Pustet, 1974.
Sanders, Ed P. Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE-66 CE. London: SCM Press, 1992.
. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion. Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1977.
. Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1985.
Sandt, Huub van de. "'Do Not Give What Is Holy to the Dogs' (Did 9:5d and Matt 7:6a):
The Eucharistic Food of the Didache in Its Jewish Purity Setting," VC 56 (2002):
223-46.
——. "The Egyptian Background of the 'Ointment' Prayer in the Eucharistic Rite of the Didache (10:8)." Pages 227-45 in The Wisdom of Egypt: Jewish, Early Christian, and Gnostic Essays. Edited by G. H. van Kooten and A. Hilhorst. Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 59. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
——. "James 4,1-4 in the Light of the Jewish Two Ways Tradition 3,1-6." Bib 88 (2007)
38-63.
——.. "Was the Didache Community a Group Within Judaism? An Assessment on the Basis of Its Eucharistic Prayers." Pages 85-107 in A Holy People; Jewish and Christian Perspectives on Religious Communal Identity. Edited by M. Poorthuis and J.
Schwartz. Jewish and Christian Perspective Series 12. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
, ed. Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
Sandt, Huub van de, and David Flusser. The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and Its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity. CRINT 3/5. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2002.
Satlow, Michael L. "A History of the Jews or Judaism? On Seth Schwartz's Imperialism and Jewish Society, 200 B.C.E. to 640 C.E." JQR 95 (2005): 151-62.
Schafer, Peter. Der Bar Kochba-Aufstand: Studien zum zweiten jiidischen Krieg gegen Rom.
Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981.
———.. "Bar Kokhba and the Rabbis." Pages 1-22 in The Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered:
New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. Edited by P. Schafer.
TSAJ 100. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
, ed. The Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. TSAJ 100. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Schechter, Solomon, ed. Aboth de Rabbi Nathan. Vienna, 1887. Repr., New York, 1945. Rev. ed. New York: Feldheim, 1967.
Schenker, Adrian. "Pureté-impureté." Pages 961-62 in Dictionnaire critique de théologie.
Edited by J.-Y. Lacoste. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1998.
Schermann, Theodor. Die allgemeine Kirchenordnung, friihchristliche Liturgien und kirchliche Uberlieferung 1: Die allgemeine Kirchenordnung des zweiten Jahrhunderts.
Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums, Supplement 3. Paderborn: Schéningh, 1914.
——. Eine Elfapostelmoral oder die X-Rezension der "beiden Wege." Veréffentlichungen aus dem Kirchenhistorischen Seminar Miinchen 2/2. Miinchen: Lentner, 1903.
Schlecht, Joseph. Doctrina XII apostolorum, Die Apostellehre in der Liturgie der katholischen Kirche. Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 1901.
Schlosser, J., ed. The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition. BETL 176. Leuven: Peeters, 2004.
Schmeller, Thomas. Paulus und die Diatribe: Eine vergleichende Stilinterpretation. NTAbh
BIBLIOGRAPHY
NS 19. Miinster: Aschendorff, 1987.
Schnackenburg, Rudolf. "Christian Perfection according to Matthew" Pages 158-89 in Christian in Existence in the New Testament. Vol. 1. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968.
——. "Die Seligpreisung der Friedensstifter (Mt 5,9) im matthaischen Kontext" BZ NF
26 (1982): 161-78.
Schnelle, Ulrich. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. 5th ed. UTB 1830. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005.
Schnider, Franz. Der Jakobusbrief. RNT. Regensburg: Pustet, 1987.
Schofield, Malcolm. The Stoic Idea of the City. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1991.
Schéllgen, Georg. "Die Didache. Ein friihes Zeugnis fiir Landgemeinden?" ZNW 76 (1985): 140-43.
——.. "Die Ignatianen als pseudepigraphisches Briefcorpus: Anmerkung zu den Thesen von Reinhard M. Hiibner."" ZAC 2 (1998): 16-25.
Schéllgen, Georg, and Wilhelm Geerlings. Didache: Zwélf-Apostel-Lehre. Traditio Apostolica. Apostolische Uberlieferung. Fontes Christiani 1. Freiburg: Herder, 1991.
Schreckenberg, Heinz. "Josephus in Early Christian Literature and Medieval Christian
Art." Pages 3-138 in Jewish Historiography and Iconography in Early and Medieval
Christianity. Edited by H. Schreckenberg and K. Schubert. CRINT 3/2. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1992 Schréter, Jens. Das Abendmahl. Friihchristliche Deutungen und Impulse fiir die Gegenwart.
SBS 210. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2006.
. Von Jesus zum Neuen Testament. Studien zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte und zur Entstehung des neutestamentlichen Kanons. WUNT 204. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
Schulze, Gerhard. Die Erlebnis-Gesellschaft: Kultursoziologie der Gegenwart. Frankfurt:
Campus, 1992.
Schiirmann, Heinz. "Wer daher eines dieser geringsten Gebote auflést...': Wo fand
Matthaus das Logion Mt 5,19?" BZ 4 (1960): 238-50.
Schwartz, Joshua. "Judea in the Wake of the Bar-Kokhva Revolt." Pages 215-23 in The Bar-Kokhva Revolt: A New Approach. Edited by A. Oppenheimer and U. Rappaport.
Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1984.
Schwartz, Seth. Imperialism and Jewish Society, 200 B.C.E. to 640 C.E. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2001.
. Josephus and Judaean Politics. Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition 18.
Leiden: Brill, 1990.
—_—. "Political, Social, and Economic Life in the Land of Israel, 66 — c. 235." Pages 23-52 in The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. Edited by S. T. Katz. Vol. 4 of The Cambridge
History of Judaism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
—. "Some Types of Jewish-Christian Interaction in Late Antiquity." Pages 197-210 in Jewish Culture and Society under the Christian Roman Empire. Edited by R. Kalmin and S. Schwartz. Leuven: Peeters, 2002.
Segal, Alan F. "Matthew's Jewish Voice." Pages 3-37 in Social History of the Matthean Community: Cross-Disciplinary Approaches. Edited by D. L. Balch. Minneapolis: Fortress,
1991.
Selwyn, Edward G. The First Epistle of Saint Peter. London: Macmillan, 1946.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Senior, Donald. "Between Two Worlds: Gentile and Jewish Christians in Matthew's Gospel." CBQ 61 (1999): 1-23.
. The Gospel of Matthew. Interpreting Biblical Texts. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997.
Shahar, Yuval. "The Underground Hideouts in Galilee and Their Historical Meaning."
Pages 217-40 in The Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. Edited by P. Schafer. TSAJ 100. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Shepherd, Massey H., Jr. "The Epistle of James and the Gospel of Matthew." JBL 75 (1956):
40-51.
Sim, David C. "The 'Confession' of the Soldiers in Matthew 27:54." Hey] 34 (1993): 50124.
——. "The Gospels for All Christians? A Response to Richard Bauckham." JSNT 24 (2001): 3-27.
——. The Gospel of Matthew and Christian Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community. Studies of the New Testament and Its World. Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1998.
——. "The Gospel of Matthew and the Gentiles." JSNT 57 (1995): 19-48.
———. "The Gospel of Matthew, John the Elder and the Papias Tradition: A Response to R.
H. Gundry.' Hervormde Teologiese Studies 63 (2007): 283-99.
——. "The Magi: Gentiles or Jews?" Hervormde Teologiese Studies 55 (1999): 980-1000.
——. "Matthew 7.21-23: Further Evidence of Its Anti-Pauline Perspective." NTS 53 (2007): 325-43.
———.. "Matthew and the Gentiles: A Response to Brendan Byrne." ABR 50 (2002): 74-79.
———. "Matthew's Anti-Paulinism: A Neglected Feature of Matthean Studies." Hervormde
Teologiese Studies 58 (2002): 767-83.
——. "The Social Setting of the Matthean Community: New Paths for an Old Journey."
Hervormde Teologiese Studies 57 (2001): 268-80.
Simon, Marcel. Verus Israel: A Study of the Relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire C.E. 135-425. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. Translation of Verus Israel: Etude sur les relations entre chrétiens et juifs dans lempire romain
(135-425). 2nd ed. Paris: Boccard: 1983.
Skarsaune, Oskar. "The Ebionites." Pages 419-62 in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries. Edited by O. Skarsaune and R. Hvalvik. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2007.
——. "Jewish Believers in Jesus in Antiquity: Problems of Definition, Method, and Sources." Pages 3-21 in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries, Edited by O.
Skarsaune and R. Hvalvik. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2007.
Skarsaune, Oskar, and Reidar Hvalvik, eds. Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries.
Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2007.
Slee, Michelle. The Church in Antioch in the First Century C.E.: Communion and Conflict.
JSNTSup 244. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003.
Slingerland, H. Dixon, "The Transjordanian Origin of Matthew's Gospel." JSNT 3 (1979):
18-28.
Smallwood, E. Mary. The Jews under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian. A Study in Political Relations. SJLA 20. Leiden: Brill, 1976. Repr., 1981.
Snodgrass, Klyne. "Matthew and the Law." Pages 179-96 in Treasures New and Old: Recent
Contributions to Matthean Studies. Edited by D. R. Bauer and M. A. Powell. Atlanta:
Scholars Press, 1996.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Séding, Thomas. Das Liebesgebot bei Paulus: Die Mahnung zur Agape im Rahmen der paulinischen Ethik. NTAbh NF 26. Miinster: Aschendorff, 1995.
Spitta, Friedrich A.W. Der Brief des Jakobus. Studien zum Hirten des Hermas. Vol. 2 of Zur
Geschichte und Literatur des Urchristentums, Edited by F. A. W. Spitta. Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1896.
Sproston North, Wendy E. "John for Readers of Mark? A Response to Richard Bauckham's
Proposal." JSNT 25 (2003): 449-68.
Stanislawski, Michael. "Salo Wittmayer Baron: Demystifying Jewish History." No pages.
Cited April 6, 2007. Online: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/alumni/Magazine/ Winter2005/llbaron.html.
Stanton, Graham. "5 Ezra and Matthean Christianity in the Second Century; JTS 28
(1977): 67-83.
———.. A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1992.
——.. "The Origin and Purpose of Matthew's Gospel: Matthean Scholarship from 1945 to
1980." ANRW 25.3:1889-1951.
Starr, James. "Was Paraenesis for Beginners?" Pages 73-111 in Early Christian Paraenesis in Context. Edited by J. Starr and T. Engberg-Pedersen. BZNW 125. Berlin: de
Gruyter, 2004.
Starr, James, and Troels Engberg-Pedersen, eds. Early Christian Paraenesis in Context.
BZNW 125. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004.
Stegemann, Ekkehard W., and Wolfgang Stegemann. Urchristliche Sozialgeschichte: Die
Anfange im Judentum und die Christusgemeinden in der mediterranen Welt. 2nd ed.
Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1997.
Stemberger, Giinter. "Der Dekalog im friihen Judentum." Jahrbuch fiir biblische Theologie
4 (1989): 91-103.
Stempel, Hermann-A. "Der Lehrer in der 'Lehre der Zwolf Apostel," VC 34 (1980): 20917.
Stewart-Sykes, Alistair. The Apostolic Church Order: The Greek Text with Introduction,
Translation and Annotation. Early Christian Studies 10. Strathfield, Australia:
Centre for Early Christian Studies, 2006.
———.. "Bread, Fish, Water and Wine: the Marcionite Menu and the Maintenance of Purity." Pages 207-20 in Marcion und seine kirchengeschichtliche Wirkung. Edited by G. May and K. Greschat. TU 150. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002.
. From Prophecy to Preaching: A Search for the Origins of the Christian Homily.
VCSup 59. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
. On the Apostolic Tradition. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's, 2001.
Stowers, Stanly K. Letter-writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity. LEC 5. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986.
——.. A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews and Gentiles. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1994.
Strack, Hermann, L., and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 6 vols. Munich: Beck, 1922-61.
Strecker, Georg. "Die Antithesen der Bergpredigt (Mt 5,21-48 par)." ZNW 69 (1978): 3672.
—_—.. Die Bergpredigt: Ein exegetischer Kommentar. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1984.
. 'Judenchristentum." TRE 17:310-35.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
——. Der Weg der Gerechtigkeit: Untersuchung zur Theologie des Matthdus. 3rd ed.
FRLANT 82. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971.
Streeter, Burnett. H. The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins. London: Macmillan, 1924.
Strugnell, John, Daniel J. Harrington, and Torleif Elgvin. Qumran Cave 4. XXIV: Sapiential
Texts, Part 2. DJD 34. Oxford: Clarendon, 1999.
Stuiber, Alfred. "Das ganze Joch des Herrn' (Didache 6,2-3)." StPatr 4 (1961): 323-29.
Sullivan, Desmond. "New Insights into Matthew 27.24-5." NBf73 (1992): 453-57.
Syreeni, Kari. "The Sermon on the Mount and the Two Ways Teaching of the Didache."
Pages 87-103 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same JewishChristian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
Sysling, Harry. "De Bar-Kochba opstand, historie en legende." Ter herkenning 14 (1986):
165-76.
Taine, Hippolyte. Philosophie de lart. 2 vols. Paris: Hachette, 1881.
Tamez, Elsa. The Scandalous Message of James: Faith Without Works Is Dead. Rev. ed. New
York: Crossroad, 2002.
Taylor, Joan E. Christians and Holy Places: The Myth of Jewish Christian Origins. Oxford:
Clarendon, 1993.
Taylor, Mark E. "Recent Scholarship on the Structure of James." Currents in Biblical
Research 3 (2004): 86-115.
Taylor, Mark E., and George H. Guthrie. "The Structure of James." CBQ 68 (2006): 681705:
Theissen, Gerd. "Nachstenliebe und Egalitat: Jak 2,1-13 als Héhepunkt urchristlicher
Ethik." Pages 120-42 in Der Jakobusbrief: Beitrage zur Rehabilitierung der "strohernen Epistel." Edited by P. von Gemiinden, M. Konradt and G. Theifen. Beitrage zum
Verstehen der Bibel 3. Miinster: Lit, 2003.
——. Die Religion der ersten Christen. 3rd ed. Darmstadt: WBG, 2003.
——. Sociology of Early Palestinian Christianity. Translated by J. Bowden. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1978. Translation of Soziologie der Jesus Bewegung. Ein Beitrag zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Urchristentums. Theologische Existenz heute NF 194. Miinchen:
Kaiser, 1977. British ed.: The First Followers of Jesus: A Sociological Analysis of Early
Christianity. London: SCM Press, 1978.
Thiselton, Anthony C. New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.
Thornton, Stephen. "Karl Popper." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. No pages. Cited
June 6, 2007. Online: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/.
Thyen, Hartwig. Der Stil der jiidisch-hellenistischen Homilie. FRLANT 65. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955.
Tilborg, Sjef van. The Jewish Leaders in Matthew. Leiden: Brill, 1972.
Tisera, Guido. Universalism According to the Gospel of Matthew. European University Studies 23/482. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1993.
Tomson, Peter J. "The Halakhic Evidence of Didache 8 and Matthew 6 and the Didache
Community's Relationship to Judaism." Pages 131-41 in Matthew and the Didache:
Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Edited by H. van de Sandt.
Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
——. "If This Be from Heaven": Jesus and the New Testament Authors in Their Relationship to Judaism. Translated by J. Dyk. The Biblical Seminar 76. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 2001.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
——. "'Jews' in the Gospel of John as Compared with the Palestinian Talmud, the Synoptics and Some New Testament Apocrypha." Pages 301-40 in Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel: Papers of the Leuven Colloquium, 2000. Edited by R. Bieringer, D.
Pollefeyt and F. Vandecasteele-Vanneuville. Jewish and Christian Heritage Series 1.
Assen: Van Gorcum, 2001.
——. "Das Matthausevangelium im Wandel der Horizonte: vom »Hause Israels« (10,6) zu »allen Vélkern« (28,19)." In Judaistik und Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft. Edited by L. Doering, H.-G. Waubke, F. Wilck. FRLANT. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, forthcoming.
———. "The New Testament Canon as the Embodiment of Evolving Christian Attitudes to the Jews." Pages 107-31 in Canonization and De-Canonization, Papers Presented to the International Conference of the Leiden Institute for the Study of Religions (LISOR) held at Leiden 9-10 January 1997. Edited by A. van der Kooij and K. van der Toorn.
Leiden: Brill, 1998.
. Paul and the Jewish Law; Halakha in the Letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles. CRINT
3/1. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1990.
———. "Paul's Practical Instruction in 1 Thess 4:1-12 Read in a Hellenistic and a Jewish
Perspective." Pages 89-130 in Not in the Word Alone: The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. Edited by M. D. Hooker. Monographic Series of "Benedictina" 15. Rome:
"Benedictina" Publishing, 2003.
——. "Die Tater des Gesetzes werden gerechtfertigt werden' (R6m 2,13)—Zu einer adaquaten Perspektive fiir den Rémerbrief" Pages 183-221 in Lutherische und neue
Paulusperspektive; Beitrage zu einem Schliisselproblem der gegenwartigen exegetischen
Diskussion. Edited by M. Bachmann. WUNT 182. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
———.. "The Wars against Rome, the Rise of Rabbinic Judaism and of Apostolic Gentile
Christianity, and the Judaeo-Christians: Elements for a Synthesis." Pages 1-31 in The Image of the Judaeo-Christians in Early Jewish and Christian Literature. Edited by P. J. Tomson and D. Lambers-Petry. WUNT 158. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Tuckett, Christopher M. "Synoptic Tradition in the Didache." Pages 92-128 in The Didache in Modern Research. Edited by J. A. Draper. AGJU 37. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine, 1969.
Un-Sok Ro, Johannes. Die Sogennante "Armenfrémmigkeit" im Nachexilischen Israel. BLAW
322. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002.
Urbach, Ephraim E., The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs. Translated by Israel Abrahams.
2 vols. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1975.
Vahrenhorst, Martin. "Ihr sollt iiberhaupt nicht schwéren": Matthdus im halachischen Diskurs. WMANT 95. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2002.
Verheyden, Joseph. "Epiphanius on the Ebionites." Pages 182-208 in The Image of the Judaeo-Christians in Ancient Jewish and Christian Literature. Edited by P. J. Tomson and D. Lambers-Petry. WUNT 158. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
——. "Eschatology in the Didache and the Gospel of Matthew.' Pages 193-215 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu?
Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
Verseput, Donald J. "Genre and Story: The Community Setting of the Epistle of James."
CBQ 62 (2000): 96-110.
Vielhauer, Philipp. Geschichte der urchristlichen Literatur: Einleitung in das Neue Testament, die Apokryphen und die Apostolischen Vater. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1981.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Viviano, Benedict T. "La Loi parfaite de liberté. Jacques 1,25 et la Loi." Pages 213-26 in The Catholic Epistles and the Tradition. Edited by J. Schlosser. BETL 176. Leuven:
Peeters, 2004.
—. "Where Was the Gospel according to St. Matthew Written?" CBQ 41 (1979): 53346.
Vogt, Hermann. J. "Bemerkungen zur Echtheit der Ignatiusbriefe." ZAC 3 (1999): 50-63.
Vouga, Francois. Lépitre de Saint Jacques. CNT 2/13a. Genéve: Labor et Fides, 1984.
Vyhmeister, Nancy J. "The Rich Man in James 2: Does Ancient Patronage Illumine the Text?" AUSS 33 (1995): 265-83.
Wachob, Wesley H. The Voice of Jesus in the Social Rhetoric of James. SNTSMS 106. Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Wall, Robert W. Community of the Wise: The Letter of James. New Testament in Context.
Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1997.
Wansbrough, Henry. "The New Israel: The Community of Matthew and the Community of Qumran." SNTSU. Serie A/25 (2000): 8-22.
Weber, Max. Ancient Judaism. New York: The Free Press, 1952.
. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Edited by G. Roth and C. Wittich. Translated by Ephraim Fischoff. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978. Translation of Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1922.
Wengst, Klaus. Didache (Apostellehre), Barnabasbrief, Zweiter Klemensbrief, Schrift an Diognet. Schriften des Urchristentums 2. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1984.
Weren, Wim J. C. De broeders van de Mensenzoon: Mt 25,31-46 als toegang tot de eschatologie van Matteiis. Amsterdam: Bolland, 1979.
——. "The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community." Pages 51-62 in Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu?
Edited by H. van de Sandt. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005.
——.. "The Use of Isaiah 5,1-7 in the Parable of the Tenants (Mark 12,1-12; Matthew
21,33-46)." Bib 79 (1998): 1-26.
Wettstein, Johan J. Novum Testamentum Graecum. Amsterdam 1752. Repr., Graz: Akademische Drucku. Verlagsanstalt, 1962.
Wick, Peter. "Volkspredigt contra Gemeinderegel? Matthaus 5-7 im Vergleich zu Matthaus
18." Kirche und Israel 13 (1998): 138-53.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von. Antigonos von Karystos. Philologische Untersuchungen 4, Berlin: Weidmann, 1881.
Wimsatt, William K., and Monroe C. Beardsley "The Intentional Fallacy." Pages 3-18 in The Verbal Icon. Edited by W. K. Wimsatt. New York: Noonday, 1966.
Windisch, Hans. Die katholischen Briefe. 3rd ed. Revised by H. Preisker. HNT 15. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1951.
Wischmeyer, Oda, "Beobachtungen zu Kommunikation und Gliederung des Jakobusbriefes." Pages 319-27 in Das Gesetz im friihen Judentum und im Neuen Testament.
Edited by D. Sanger and M. Konradt. NTOA 57. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006.
——. "Romer 2.1-24 als Teil der Gerichtsrede des Paulus gegen die Menschheit"" NTS 52
(2006): 356-76.
Wright, Benjamin G. "The Categories of Rich and Poor in the Qumran Sapiential Litera-
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ture." Pages 101-23 in Sapiential Perspectives: Wisdom Literature in Light of the Dead
Sea Scrolls. Edited by J. J. Collins, G. E. Sterling, and R. A. Clements. Studies in the Texts of the Desert of Judah 51. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
Wright, Benjamin G., and Claudia V. Camp, "Who Has Been Tested by Gold and Found
Perfect?' Ben Sira's Discourse of Riches and Poverty." Henoch 23 (2001) 153-74.
Wright, R. B., trans. "The Psalms of Solomon." Pages 639-70 in vol. 2 of The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1985.
Yarnold, Edward. "TéAeiog in St. Matthew's Gospel." Pages 269-73 in Studia Evangelica.
Vol. 4. Edited by F. L. Cross. TU 102. Berlin: Akademie, 1968.
Zangenberg, Jiirgen. "A Conflict among Brothers. Who Were the hypokritai in Matthew?" in Festschrift for Sean Freyne. Edited by M. Daly Denton, B. McGing and Z. Rodgers. Leiden: Brill, forthcoming.
——. "Matthew and James." Pages 104-22 in Matthew and His Contemporaries. Edited by D. Sim and B. Repschinski. LNTS 333. London: Continuum, 2008.
—. SAMAREIA. Antike Quellen zur Geschichte und Kultur der Samaritaner in deutscher
Ubersetzung. TANZ 15. Tubingen: Francke, 1994.
Zerbe, Gordon M. Non-Retaliation in Early Jewish and New Testament Texts: Ethical
Themes in Social Contexts. JSPSup 13. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.
Zetterholm, Magnus. The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation between Judaism and Christianity. London: Routledge, 2003.
———.. "Paul and the Missing Messiah." Pages 33-55 in The Messiah: In Early Judaism and Christianity. Edited by M. Zetterholm. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
——.. "Purity and Anger: Gentiles and Idolatry in Antioch." Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 1 (2005): 1-24.
Zmijewski, Josef. "Christliche "Volkommenheit': Erwagungen zur Theologie des Jakobusbriefes." SNTSU, Serie A/ 5 (1980): 50-78.
Zuckermandel, Moses. S., ed. Tosephta. Pasewalk 1881. Repr., Jerusalem: Wahrmann,
1970.
Can
' o_
iva se Sete hth, 20) Aes oh The om ) lhe) . hae. wie ewyhi le Pope! att hi oad
<> es > etl LG , 'wae' el Spi i i, a
Pot aaa SS at PE agi" bi ac! i. nae gt Lis a ee ee ee ee j"'buetS » afd ad wan he * ip ~ mh A a bd nm * eel io > - \ 224.4
$ +) va} ue pe) acpi: erie ae its ; neh se geen Cogueltt 2?
THAT ni an! RO tdor® Ae eeiednhe a Ad eect ie aE thigh weeds hohe' é 'h-est hae BO ae, jah S < pak sp 5 ~ Pee 9 ore Din oe) ~ | MAN hme AAS > ML A eg eee eK Sastinn) gloss.
Sy abby a = erty hank, th @eahan lw Aad '
ve) ee dt > me Nina; ceded Une el wt ee eee 4 eee ed S4.
.. 4 . eh ee a ee oT ee a Pee care - : wane \ pp ein, 3A
CONTRIBUTORS
Jonathan Draper is Professor of New Testament and Head of the Biblical Studies Programme at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (Pietermaritzburg
Campus). Some of his publications are Orality, Literacy and Colonialism in Antiquity, editor (Semeia Studies 47; Society of Biblical Literature and Brill, 2004);
Performing the Gospel: Mark, Orality and Memory (edited with R. A. Horsley and J. Miles Foley; Augsburg, 2006); Reading the Signs of the Times: Taking the Bible into the Public Square (edited with C. Kittredge and E. Aitken; Fortress, 2008).
Patrick John Hartin is Professor of New Testament at Gonzaga University, Spokane, Washington. His most recent publications are the Sacra Pagina commentaries on the Letter of James and James of Jerusalem and Heir to Jesus of Nazareth (both Liturgical Press).
John S. Kloppenborg is a Professor and Chair of the Department and Centre for the Study of Religion at the University of Toronto. His most recent publications are Q, the Earliest Gospel (Westminster John Knox, 2008) and The Tenants in the Vineyard: Ideology, Economics, and Agrarian Conflict in Jewish Palestine
(Mohr Siebeck, 2006).
Matthias Konradt is Professor for New Testament at the University of Bern. Some of his recent publications are Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion von Gerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der paulinischen
Ekklesiologie und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor (BZNW 117, 2003) and Israel, Kirche und die Vélker im Matthdusevangelium (WUNT 215; Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
J. Andrew Overman is Professor of Classics at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn. He is author of two monographs and numerous articles on Matthew's
Gospel including Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism: The Social World of the Matthean Community (Fortress, 1990) and Church and Community in Crisis:
The Gospel according to Matthew (Continuum, 1996). He is currently director of excavations at Omrit (Caesarea Phillipi) in northern Galilee under the auspices of Macalester College.
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Boris Repschinski, S.J. is Professor for New Testament studies at the Leopold Franzens Universitaet Innsbruck. He has written a dissertation on "The Controversy Stories in the Gospel of Matthew" and published a number of articles on Matthew.
Jens Schroeter is Professor of New Testament Exegesis and Theology, Theological Faculty, University of Leipzig. His most recent publications are Das
Abendmahl: Friihchristliche Deutungen und Impulse fiir die Gegenwart (SBS 210; Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2006), Jesus von Nazareth. Jude aus Galilaa—Retter der
Welt (Biblische Gestalten 15, 2006; Von Jesus zum Neuen Testament. Studien zur urchristlichen Theologiegeschichte und zur Entstehung des neutestamentlichen
Kanons (WUNT 204; Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
David C. Sim is Associate Professor in the Faculty of Theology at Australian Catholic University. He is the author of The Gospel of Matthew and Christian
Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community (T&T Clark, 1998), and a co-editor of The Gospel of Matthew in Its Roman Imperial Context
(T&T Clark, 2005), and Matthew and His Christian Contemporaries (T&T Clark, 2008).
Alistair Stewart-Sykes is Vicar of The Bridge Parishes, Dorset, UK. His expertise is in the formation of Christian liturgy. His most recent book is The Didascalia apostolorum (Brepols, 2008).
Peter J. Tomson is professor of New Testament, Rabbinics and Patristics at the Faculty of Protestant Theology in Brussels, Belgium. He co-edited The Literature of the Sages (1987, 2006) in the CRINT series and is general editor of the CRINT section on Jewish Traditions in early Christian Literature.
Martin Vahrenhorst is Director of the study program "Studium in Israel" at the Hebrew University Jerusalem and lecturer in New Testament exegesis at the Kirchliche Hochschule Wuppertal. His recent publications include Ihr sollt tiberhaupt nicht schworen. Matthaus im halachischen Diskurs (WMANT 95;
Neukirchener Verlag, 2002) and Kultische Sprache in den Paulusbriefen (WUNT 230; Mohr Siebeck, 2008).
Huub van de Sandt is Lecturer of New Testament Studies at Tilburg University, The Netherlands. Some recent publications are Matthew and The Didache:
Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu?, editor (Van Gorcum/ Fortress, 2005) and The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and Its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (with D. Flusser; CRINT III/5; Van Gorcum-Fortress, 2002).
CONTRIBUTORS
Joseph Verheyden (S.T.D.) is Professor of New Testament at the Faculty of Theology of the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium. Recent publications include Miracles and Imagery in Luke and John: Festschrift Ulrich Busse (edited with G. Van Belle and J. G. van der Watt (BETL 218; Peeters, 2008).
Wim Weren is Professor of New Testament, at Tilburg University, The Netherlands. His recent publications include numerous articles and essays about Matthew.
Oda Wischmeyer holds the chair for New Testament Studies at the University of Erlangen-Niirnberg and serves as director of the Institut for New
Testament Studies. Recent major publications are Paulus: Leben-Umwelt-WerkBriefe, editor (UTB 2767; Francke, 2006), Die Bibel als Text: Beitrage zu einer textbezogenen Bibelhermeneutik, with St. Scholz (NET 14; Francke, 2008) and Lexikon der Bibelhermeneutik, editor (de Gruyter, 2009).
Jiirgen Zangenberg is Professor of New Testament Exegesis and Early Christian Literature at the Faculty of Humanities and Professor of Archaeology at the Faculty of Archaeology of Leiden University, The Netherlands. His most recent publications are Qumran—The Site of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Archaeological Interpretations and Debates. Proceedings of a Conference Held at Brown University
November 17-19, 2002 (edited with K. Galor and J.-B. Humbert; STDJ 57; Brill, 2006), and Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in Ancient Galilee: A Region in Transition (edited with H. W. Attridge and D. B. Martin; WUNT 210; Mohr Siebeck,
2007).
Magnus Zetterholm is Associate Professor of New Testament Studies at Lund University, Sweden. He is the author of The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation between Judaism and Christianity, (Routledge, 2003) and the editor of The Messiah: In Early Judaism and Christianity (Fortress Press, 2007). His forthcoming monograph, Approaches to Paul: A Student's Guide to Recent Scholarship, will be published by Fortress
Press in 2009.
pare Phael cna a Poe ey A pis we o* state, saris soiree =
Sh) per ON Ree syn tpt nay: 4
U ey '
= = e s at mS) 7 oe lawt » —. | 1° nm ae 4 inary ve , ney , ¢ tert ; Jf beqaes d = — ) ae | f '
P a yy or it~ ¥4 7 vi — 1 Lona P a AU 7 wt ¢ , J a ay' pes 27> motion > TR UR ea aa él th rs be, i le fake "5 call atin Sy Opal ale sah Suet tn eatin i an,5 ores a LS) /& "4 —
INDEX OF SOURCES
HEBREW BIBLE
18:24-30
18:26
82-83 GENESIS
187, 194, 274, 284, 306
19:2
19:9-10
y# an} | Exopus 19:10 yA)
19:11
19:11-18
326, 329 19:12
284, 326, 329 12:5
19:5-6 20:7
20:12-16
19:13
19:15
205, 279, 284, 306
19:16
284, 370
19:17-18 276, 281, 284
19:18
6, 187, 189, 194-95, 196,
Di2, 293, S02
19:21
19:31
82, 381
19:34
20:16 a3 23:6
23:11
24:1-11 24:4
28:21
20:1-3
20:22-26
21:18
39:14
LEVITICUS
23:22
11-15 11:24-28 11:39-40 12-15
NUMBERS
12:3
Ze 82-83 14:20-24
18:8-32
13:45
16:4
30:2
16:24
35:33-34
19:2
17-18 18:1-5
DEUTERONOMY
5:17-18
18:5
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
65:4-6 Deuteronomy (cont'd) 208, 213, 223, 310
66:1
5:20
6:4-5 293, 306 66:2
6:5
6, 196, 277, 283, 306, 372 14:3-21
JEREMIAH
13:11 zis 2:23
18:13
18:15-22
18:18-22 145, 158 13:17
13:21
20:11
21:8-10 18:19
151, 158 23:22
22:5
24:14
22:16
24:15
30:15-20
26:9
31:8
2 SAMUEL 5:6-8
EZEKIEL
16:49
7:16
18:12
22:29
2 KINGS 34:31
37:21-22 22:28
ISAIAH HOSEA 1:16
3:14-15
4:16
6:6
9:1-2
6:10
10:2
11:4
208, 212-13 AMOS 14:30
212-13
212-13 2:6-7
14:32
25:4
26:5-6
4:1
5:11-12 29:19
208, 212-13
208, 212-13 40:11
8:4
MICAH 41:17
6:8
49:19
7:14
54:11
56:7
ZEPHANIAH
58:4
58:7
3:12
60:21
61:1
209, 212, 223
INDEX OF SOURCES
ZECHARIAH
69:33
207, 208, 212-13 70:5
207, 213 72:2
72:4
74:19
74:21
76:9
76:10
82:2
86:1
79:13
86:1-2
88:15
95:7
100:3
102:1
109:16
109:22
109:31
113:7
132:15
132:15-16
140:12
146:6
147:6
212-13, 226 149:4
sak
7:10
9:9
10:3
26:6
PSALMS 9:12
208, 212-13
208, 212-13
208, 212-13 208, 212-13
208, 212-13 208, 213, 226
208, 225
9:13
9:18
9:19
9:23
9:30
9:35
10:2
10:9
10:12
10:17
12:2
12:15
14:6
18:27
22:24
22:27
25:9
PROVERBS 25:16
3:34
2135245 32:1
Eee 6:9-11
10:15
11:24
13:8
14:21
14:23
14:31
16:19
19:1
19:4
19:7
19:17
21:5
22:16
34:3
34:4
207, 213 207, 213
34:6
35:10
36:11
Srit 208, 212-13,
207, 213
37:14
40:2
40:17
Biss 68:10
69:29
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
213, 391
19:6
Proverbs (cont'd)
19:10
22:19
33:13
24:34
27221
LEVITICUS
28:6
29:7
11:24
30:14
18:24
31:9
31:20
187, 194
193-95
19:2
19:10
Jos
19:15
14:4
187, 189, 194-96
19:18
15:14
19:16
20:19
205, 20:3
24:4
24:9
21:1
23:22
24:14
29:7-9 24:16
29:12
29: 12-16 NUMBERS 34:28
36:6
8:21
12:8
12:3
RUTH
4:18-22 19:12
21:5
QOHELETH / ECCLESIASTES
31:23
4:13-14 10:6
DEUTERONOMY
4:6
5:17-18 14:28-29 DANIEL
6:11
15:11
187, 298
18:13
1 CHRONICLES
21:23
25:8
24:14
24:15
SEPTUAGINT
26:5
GENESIS 17:4
1 KINGDOMS
2:8
Exopus
2 KINGDOMS
INDEX OF SOURCES
22:28
36:14
213, 217
ce og
4 KINGDOMS
39:18
25:12
40:2
223, 217
213,217
67:10
ToOBIT 68:29
69:5
12:9
69:6
71:2
1 MACCABEES
71:4
1:62
71:12
71:13
2 MACCABEES
6-7 73:19
245, 217
2135217 73:21
75:10
4 MACCABEES
5:19-21 77:19
81:3 rays aiarely 81:4
PSALMS 85:1
213, 225
1:1
213,247 213,217
87:15
6:9
101:1
8:3
108:16
9:12
108:22
9:18
9:13
139:12
9:19
139:13
9:23
213, 226 146:6
9:30, 9:33
PROVERBS 9:35
3:34
9:38
12:28
14:21
11:6
16:19
13:6
22:22
AFize 24:77
21:24
213, 217 31:20
21:27
24:9
ECCLESIASTES
24:16
10:6
33:3
33:6
Jos 213, 217
34:10
24:4
29:12
36:11
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
7:10
Job (cont'd) 213, 217
34:28
26:6
36:6
ISAIAH WISDOM 248, 326 10:2
213,217 14:25
11:4
14:32
SIRACH / ECCLESIASTICUS
29:19
32:7
3:30
49:19
4:17
7:30
13:20-23 15:11-17
23:9-11 54:11
58:4
61:1
213,225 66:2
213, 220 JEREMIAH 25:2
29:12
22:16
34:22
40:17
EZEKIEL 40:24
16:49
42:2
18:12
22:29
PSALMS OF SOLOMON
213, 217
5:2
OT PsEUDEPIGRAPHA
10:6
Apocalypse of Moses 15:3] 5:11
9.3
17.26
17.40
2 Baruch
18:2
41:3
AMOS 4 Baruch
213, 217
1 Enoch (Ethiopic Apocalypse) 90.20-27
92-105
4:1
8:4
ZEPHANIAH
96.8
2:3
2 Enoch (Slavonic Apocalypse) Sfi2 40.1-2
ZECHARIAH
Letter of Aristeas
INDEX OF SOURCES
Jos.
3.5
Life of Adam and Eve
Jud.
25.4
Ps.-Phocylides Zeb.
5.1-8.3
5-79
248, 326
DEAD SEA SCROLLS
1QH®* / Thanksgiving Hymns#
XI, 24-25
21s m1 25
Sentences of the Syriac Menander 99-104
354-358
435-436
427-428
XIII, 13, 14
2S XIII, 18
1QM / War Scroll XI, 13
XIV, 7
1QS / Rule of the Community Sibylline Oracles 2.68
4.165
8.208
8.481
III, 5-9
III, 18-IV, 26
V, 24-VI, 1
VIII, 1
4Q161 / plsa*
8-10 III, 3-4
4Q163 / pIsa© 26 1-3
23 13-19
8-10 11-14; 18-19 1-6
4Q165 / pIsa€ 6 2-7
4Q171/ pPs@ Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs Ash.
2.6
213, 326 Benj.
4.4
8.2
Dan II, 9-12 pA Mas ge |
III, 8-11
Z2i 4Q258 1 11,4
4Q415
4Q416 2 Il, 20-21
2 Ill, 2
2 Ill, 12
5.3
6.9
2EL Gad 4.2-3
7.6
Iss.
3.8
5.2
213, 277, 282 6 fs
7.6
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Dead Sea Scrolls (cont'd) 4Q417 a1
4Q418
4Q424
Legat.
Mut.
Sacr.
III, 9-10
4Q521 2 Il, 12
11Q19 / 11QTemple Scroll* Spec. eae
2.12
2.62
61:1-4
CD / Damascus Document 2.63
2.163
XV, 1-3
2.225
3.182
GREEK JEWISH WRITERS
JOSEPHUS
NEw TESTAMENT
Ag. Ap.
2.190
MATTHEW 1.167
2.282
84, 87 1:1-18
1:21
179, 282, 354, 381-82 1:23
184, 192 Ant.
2:6
179, 293 2:18-26
16.36
20.200
117, 121 6.24
2:20
18.117
Life 2:21
3:6
3:7-10
3:9-10
3:11-12
3:14-15
4:12-16
War 2.393
2.645-646
4.225
4.382
4:16
4:24
PHILO 4:25
263, 273-74, 277, 282, 346 |
5-7 174-75, 323, 345-46, 355-56 aS 182, 202, 223-24, 309 Alleg. Interp.
3.241
Decal.
5:3-7:27
144, 324 5:4
p> 221, 223-24
INDEX OF SOURCES
44] 5:6
79, 223-24 5:31-32
325-26
324-25, 329-30, 335 5:33-37 247, 310, 325, 367-69, 375 5:34
5:7
223, 241 5:7-9
5:32
5:33
S33a 5:33b 5:33-34a 5:8
5:9
187, 223, 273 5:10
5:11-12 223-24
325-26
325-26 324, 326
251, 300
5:12
5:34a 5:34b-36 5:34b-37 B35 5:t3
5:13-16
5:14
5:17
78, 246, 324, 327, 368, 373,
5:37a 5:38-39a 5:38-41 5:38-47 5:17-18
5:17-19 30,324, 328-30, 334-35 5:17-20 78-81, 131, 165, 189, 235, 246, 272, 324, 327-28, 362, 368, 370, 387 5:17-48 7, 144, 285, 315-16, 318, 323-24, 329-330, 334-35 5:18
315, 327 5:18-19 327, 334 5:19
79, 80, 184, 188, 194, 327-28,
5:20
79, 188, 272, 315, 328-29, 335 5:39
5:39b 5:39b-42 5:39b-43 5:41
6, 187, 272-73 324, 326, 355 187-88 276, 315, 329, 338
5:43
5:43-44 5:43-47 5:43-48 5:44
5:44-45 5:44-48 5:21
5:21-22 316, 324-25, 329-30, 334-35 5:21-23
5:21-30
5:21-47 187, 294, 329 5:21-48 303, 323-24, 328-29, 335, 367 182, 187, 273, 299, 303
5:45
5:45-48 187, 273
187-88 5:46
5:46-47 5:47
5:48
183, 186-88, 196, 241, 246, 276, 299-300, 303, 315, 328, Le
5:23-26
335, 338, 370 6:1
6:1-18 119, 285 6:1-4
5:25
5:26
Sar
5:27-28 316, 324-25, 329-30, 334-35 5:28
5:29-30 263, 324 6:1-7:12
6:2
6:5
6:5-18
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Matthew (cont'd) 8:28-34
6:7-8
8:29
6:9-13
8:32
6:14-15 251, 303 9:2-8
6:16
9:2-13
6:16-18 56, 59 9:4
6:19-21
9:13
277, 387 6:24
276, 280, 305 9:33
6:31-32
9:36-38
6:33
79, 183, 276 10:1
149, 151, 183 6:44-46
10:4
6:52
10:5
148, 150 7:1
10:5-6 23, 179, 293, 370 ThAs:
10:6
7:6
10:7-8
7:6a
10:8
7:7-8
10:8-42
7:12
6, 283, 324, 387 10:9
7:15
10:9-15
7:13-14 50, 183, 185 10:10
162, 252 10:16
7:15-16
10:17
7:15-23 61, 144, 174 10:20
10:23
7:20
10:26-33
7:21
159, 313 10:40-—42
Fer:
146, 151 11:1
7:23
11:5
202, 222 7:24-25
Lins
7:24-27 241, 311 L25
7:28
11:25-27
11:28-30
8:1-4
11:29
197, 393 8:4
11:29-30 68, 294 8:5-13
12:7
277, 387 8:5-13 118, 385 12:9
8:10
12:24
8:11-12
12:31-32
8:20
12:31-33
8:20-22
12:33
8:21-22
12:50
8:23-27
13:1-7
8:28
13:11
182, 184
INDEX OF SOURCES
13:36
Rae |
17:27
13:38
179, 182 18:6
18:14-20
13:43
13:51
148, 184 18:15
225, 281 18:15-17
13-52 148, 359
14:19
18:17
178, 287 14:21
15:1-9 18:18
18:21
18:21-35
198, 385
15:1-20 15:2
18:24
19:11-12
19:16-22 147, 189, 241, 276, 280-81 15:2a.3a 15:2b.3b 15:3
19:17
19:18-19 274, 278, 329 15:4a.5a 15:7
19:19
6, 272, 276;2815
15:9
15:10-11 19:20
19:20-21
15:11
19:21
186, 189, 222, 241, 276, 299-300 15:12
19:28
181, 293-94 19:28-29
20:26-28
20:37
21:12-13
21:23-24:1
21:33-43
21:33-44
15:13
15:18
15:19
15:20
¥5-23 23, 179, 293, 387
15:24
45-25 15-27 21:43 rae 21:45
23,179 22:1-7
22:1-10 15,23
15:31
15:36
178, 184
16:12
16:16-17 16:17
22:15
23,202; 270 22:18
22:34-35
22:34-40 Zt1, 201; Wile 22:36-40
22:37-40 6, 274 22:38-39 282-83 178, 183
16:18
16:18-19 16:19
16:23
16:24
Ba 22:39
6, 272, 283, 305 17:24
17:24-27 22:40
283, 387 22:41-46
17:26
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
225, 388
25:31-46 Matthew (cont'd)
25:34
23:1
23:1-39 23:2-3 23:4-7 23:7-8 25:40
26:9-11 148, 26:25
26:26-29 59, 384 282, 384
147, 119, 183-84 26:28
23:8
23:8-12
132, 26:49
26:74
23:9
27:9
27:19-25 23:10
23:11-12 179, 384
23, 117
27:25
23:12
23:13-15 23:13-29 23:16-22 27:42
27:62-66 27:63-64 367, 27:64
27:65-66 188, 23:23
23:23b 28:11
28:11-15 28:16-20 23:28
23:29-39 29, 155
29-30, 67, 150, 370 293-94, 370 174, 23:34
23:34-37 28:18
28:19
28:19-20 23:38
24-25 148, 175, 184 28:20
24:1
24:11-12 MARK 24:12
24:21-24
1:4
1:28
24:30
24:42-25:13
1:29
S13 24:45
24:45-51 25:1-13 6:12
40, 68
222, 299
271, 282, 305 6:13
6:30
25:4
6:41
25:9
25:14-30 7:1-13 f jlo"
25:15
7:19
7:24-30 25:16
25:20
10:19
25122 10:21
11:23-24 25:24
25825 12:29
25:28
12:31
INDEX OF SOURCES
A311
9:22
13:14
12:42
13:19-22
13:34-35
13:26
15:12
13:33-37
15:12-13 e71 15:43-47
ESsh7
16:2
LUKE 1-2
AcTs 4:18
2:38
6:20
2:42
47, 156, 240 6:20-49
5:12
6:27-28
6:1-7
6:27-36
6:28
8:16
6:29-30
9:36
6:30
10:1
6:33-36
10:14
381, 386 6:36
246, 299 10:48
6:37
11:30
6:43-44
14:23
6:45
15:1
15:1-29
7:24-27
15:2
9:16
15:4
10:27
15:5
11:2-4
15:7-21
11:9-10
15:20
11:21
15:22-23
12:35-40
15:22-35
14:11
15:29
16:18
19:5
18:14
18:20
26:18
19:41-44
21:20
ROMANS 21227 pA a i Let
22:30
147, 181
2:13
JoHN 3:1-2
fete,
4:13-25
9:2
242-43 9:6-7
5:3-4
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Romans (cont'd) 15:52
5:4
2 CORINTHIANS
5Avt
9:4-5
11:13
GALATIANS
Li25
1:19
Hi 12:14-21
2:1-10 84, 120
2:7-9
12:9
2:11-14 21, 80, 83 13:8-10 287, 329; 302 2:12
13:9
194, 305 2:14
13:9-10
2:20
14:14a
5:1
15:31
5:33
16:7
5:14
271, 305, 329 16:23
6:13
1 CORINTHIANS
EPHESIANS
is?
12135
1:26-28
4:20-26
SeL7
5:8
6:1-2
6:9-11
PHILIPPIANS
6:11
1:1
63, 168 6:19
1:10
7:10
2:14
Pile
4:21
7:14
3:20
7:18-19
7:25
CoLossIANs 8:1-3
1:5
8:13
3:8-10
3:14
3:14
10:14-11:1
1 THESSALONIANS
10:23-11:1
4:3
12:3
4:16
12:28-29
4:15
15:23-28
INDEX OF SOURCES
5:4-5
1:14
38, 331 1:14-15 191, 323, 331, 336-37,
1:14-20
2 THESSALONIANS
3:7-13
1:15
190, 331, 355 1:16
1 TIMOTHY
1:17
38, 184, 190, 236, 242, 297, 302, 375, 390
2 TIMOTHY
1:17-18 267, 348 1:18
38, 184, 190, 192, 199, 291, 298, 347, 376, 390 1:19
35, 190, 391 1:19-20 331-32, 337, 389 1:19-21 331-32, 336-37, 356 1:19-25
1:19-27
1:19d-20
1:20
170, 302, 315 1:21
179, 184, 225-26, 237, 332,
1:22 oped 1:22-25
1:22-27
1:23
390-91 1:23-24
2:8
HEBREWS 10:29
11:13
JAMES 1:1
34, 39, 168, 180, 185, 287, 289, 291, 297, 302, 376, 390 1:2
34, 242 1:2-3
1:2-4 241, 389 1:2-18
1:3
190, 242 1:3-4
1:4
186, 190, 242-44, 297, 315, 338, 375 1:25
68, 170-71, 190, 192, 242, 267, 278, 292, 297, 376, 390-91 1:5
184, 190, 244, 246, 302, 390 1:5-8 304, 389 1:26
Hi) 1:26-27 40, 267, 277, 391 1:6
375, 390 1:6-8
1:27 35, 38, 40, 184, 292, 279, 298, 302-3, 388-89 1:7
184, 190, 302, 390 2:1 . 39,185, 193, 236,238, 279, 1:8
190, 204, 304, 305, 355, 391 302, 306, 308 2:1-5 227,932 2:1-7 225, 306, 389 2:1-13 193, 231, 241, 280-81, 306,
1:9
1:9-11 225, 227, 241, 245, 389, 391 1:10-11 227, 390 1:11
1:12
184, 191, 204, 243, 279, 357,
1:12-15
2:2
35, 180, 193, 268, 287 2:2-4 194, 279 2:2-7
1:13
38, 302 1:13-15 331, 332, 337 1:13-18 185, 389 1:13-21 7, 316 2:3
2:4
193, 267
MATTHEW,
JAMES, AND DIDACHE
3:1
35, 171, 185, 190, 358 3:1-2
3:1-11
3:1-12
James (cont'd) 35, 38, 185, 193, 227, 245, aD
2:5-6a 3:1-18
194, 279, 332
BX 2:5-7 2:6b 2:6b-7 3:2
3:5
3:6
2:6-7 pA 3:9
39, 333, 347, 349 3:10
3:10-12
2:8
6, 190, 271, 278-81, 297, 306, 308, 315, 333, 338, 355, 376 2:8-9 194, 333 2:8-11 7, 41, 269, 316, 332-34, 338 2:8-12 2:8-13 3:12
3:13
190, 225-26, 290 3:13-18 311, 243, 336 3:13-4:10
336, 389 68, 132, 192, 292 38, 170, 194
3:14
3:14-16
2:8-9 193, 195, 267, 279
2:9
3:15
38, 184 2:9-12 120, 190, 316, 334 298, 333-34, 355 192-94, 279, 316 267, 376
241, 279
132, 232, 311, 389
38, 184, 267, 302, 306 3:16
2:10
2:10-11 3:17
38, 184, 241, 243 2:14
3:18
4:1
35, 169, 267, 336 2:12-13 4:1-2
4:1-3 174, 391 4:1-4 7, 269, 316, 331, 335-338 4:1-6 331, 336 2:13
2:14
2:14-16 2:14-17 4:1-5:6
4:1-10
2:14-19 2:14-25 2:14-26 4:2
333, 336-37, 392 4:3
2:15
2:15-16 4:4
289, 292, 297-98, 302, 333, 336-37, 392 2:18
4:4-6
4:4-10
2:19
2:20
2:20-26 22) 2:21-25
2:22-23 35, 190
228, 242
4:6
4:7
302, 357 4:7-8
4:7-10 298, 336, 356 35, 190, 297, 301
4:8
302, 304, 389, 391, 392 4:8-10
2:23
170, 302
4:10
244, 302, 347 2:24
4:11
35, 120, 192, 278, 376 2:25
INDEX OF SOURCES
4:11-12 170, 280-82, 284, 292, 333, 336 1:23-2:1
2:9
4:12
38, 184, 193, 280, 347 2:11
4:13
4:13-17 35-36, 228 4:13-5:6
204, 389 2:17
4:8 aS 248, 271
4:14
5:6
4:15
39, 184, 302 4:17
5:1-4
2 PETER
1:16-21 5:1-5
5:1-6 35, 38 1 JOHN 5:4
36, 38, 184, 302, 306
3:11
5:7
36, 185, 227, 302 5:7-11
5:7-8
3 JOHN
5:8
185, 357 5:9
35, 39
REVELATION
5:10
39, 168, 184, 302
5:5
5:11
39, 184, 190, 238, 302-3
7:4-8 5:12
247, 310, 325, 375
21212 ZiT 5:12a
5:12b
5:12¢
5:13-18 303, 389
SAYINGS "SOURCE" (Q) 7, 58, 142-43,
145-47, 167, 170, 174-75, 218, 308-10, 314, 323, 326 Q 6:20
Q 6:20b Q 7:22
Q 10:7
Q 12:2-9
Q 12:51-53
Q 14:26
Q 14:26-27
O172 Q 17:3-4 Q 17:33
223, 309 5:14
35, 64, 68, 173, 180, 185, 236, 287, 302 5:14-18
PERSP LY:
5:15
184, 302, 347, 353 5:15-16
5:16
5:19
35, 190 5:20
190, 347 1 PETER
242-43 {:} 34, 180 1:6
1:6-7
Lsh7
1:22
196, 218, 249, 283
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
3:2-3 330, 337 3:2-6 318, 321, 330 3:3
319, 331, 337, 355 Didache (cont'd) 1-6 155, 165, 196, 288 iy}
3:4
1:1-2 218, 305 3:5
3:6
3:7
3:7-10 220-22 3:7-4:4
5, 201, 219-20 3:7-8
3:8
220, 241 3:9
3:10
4:1
186, 238, 303, 358 4:1-2
4:1-4 220, 222 4:2
4:4
304-5, 355 4:9-10
4:10
1:1-3a
1:1-4:8
1:1-6:1
53-54 1:1-6:2
1:1-6:3
50-51, 295, 301, 307, 310 1:2
6, 185, 196, 249, 282-83, 285, 295, 307, 334, 338, 355, 372 1:2-5
1s 46, 251, 285, 307 1:3a
1:3b
1:3-2:1
196, 218 1:3-6 174, 371 1:3b-2:1 5, 49, 155, 196, 218, 28485, 305, 310, 317-18 1:3-3:10
1:4
196, 241, 249, 251, 285, 300 1:4b-5a
4:11
4:12
186, 241 4:12-13
4:13
186, 373 4:14
181, 393 4:16
307, 329 5:2
216, 219-20, 241, 307 6:1
79, 165, 197, 249, 317, 373 6:1-2 68, 80, 86, 88 6:1-3 66, 79 1:5
250-51, 264 1:5a
2:1-2
2:1-7
194, 318, 371 2:2-6
2:2-6:1
6, 218 2:2-7
2:3
247, 284 6:2 5, 79, 86, 88, 170, 181, 186-87, 2:4
305, 355 196, 238, 241, 249, 285, 300, 318, 355, 373, 393 6:2-3 67, 147, 162, 196, 285, 296,
2:6
2:6-7
3:1
319-21, 330, 332 6:2a
6:2b
3:1-3 329, 335 3:1-6 7, 50, 219-20, 266, 284, 315-16, 318-19, 322-23, 329-32, 334, 336-38, 356 6:3
67, 78-79, 89, 157, 249, 318,
7-10 60-61, 239, 251 7-15
3:2
3:2ab
INDEX OF SOURCES
7:1
51, 78, 157, 165, 288, 317 7:1-10:7
7:1-3
11:3-6 63, 78, 165 61, 80, 89, 156-57, 186, 238 11:4
11:4-6
156-57, 165 156-57, 162, 165, 174 7:1-4
11:5
7:2
11:6
7:3
7:4
157, 239
8:1
55, 59-60, 239, 264 8:1-2 239, 285 8:1-10:7
11:6-12
11:7
158, 174 11:7b
11:7-8 11:7-12
11:8
174, 186, 238
8:2 58, 60, 66, 155, 186, 238, 264, 371, 373 8:2-3
8:3
9-10 59-60, 239 9:1
78, 157 9:1-10:6
9:1-10:7
52, 55, 59, 67 11:8b 11:9
11:9-12 61, 161
61, 63, 181 11:10
11:11
Br be 61, 161, 174
12:1
63, 156 12:1-5 9:2
59-60, 116, 185, 295
12:4
9:3
78, 185, 252 9:3-4
152, 161
9:4
60, 69, 181, 185
58, 60, 62, 186, 238-39, 394 13:1-2 61, 157, 161 13:1
10:1
157, 160 10:2
60, 185, 252 13:1-7
63, 163 61, 63, 218, 373-74
10:3
10:5
181, 186, 196, 198, 238, 249 10:6
160, 168, 238, 295, 394 13:3
13:3-4
13:3-7 61, 216, 218
13:4 je) 10:7
61, 160 10:8
49, 68, 157 13:5-6
11-13 52,118 161, 163 | Fi 52, 393-94
11:1
11:1-13:7
52-53,
11:1-2 63, 78-81, 165, 174-75 11:1-6
186, 238 14:1
62, 64, 67 14:1-3 47, 52, 61, 394 14:2
52, 186, 238, 394
14:3
11:2 78-80, 89, 148, 165, 186, 238,
11:2-3
11:3
66, 155, 157, 166, 174-75, 15:1
52, 63-64, 67, 166, 186, 238,
15:1-2 63, 139, 161, 163, 166, 174 186, 239 11:3-13
15:1-3
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
220, 222
13.4
Didache (cont'd) 15:2
yi 15:3
47, 155, 186, 239, 265 15:3-4
46.7
49.1-50.7
2 Clem.
15:4
59, 133, 155, 186, 238-39
11.2
16:1
186, 238 16:1-2
16:1-8
Cyprian Ep.
16:2
196-97, 252, 301 16:2b
74.5.1
De rebaptismate 16:3
162, 165
Epistle to Diognetus
16:4
162, 253 16:5
16:6
16:7
186, 238, 301 16:7-8 238, 253 7.7
16:8
186, 238 Epiphanius Panarion II
OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITINGS
15.1
Acts of Paul Eusebius
zn Historia ecclesiastica
1,2-3 Apostolic Constitutions 49, 164 3.5-9
3.39.3-16 Barnabas, Epistle of Ps.- 4.2
4:9
18-20 18.1-20:2
4.6
4.8.4
39.16
Gospel of Peter 19.2
19.2-7 19.9-10
12.50
Gospel of Thomas
Clement of Alexandria Stromata Hermas, Shepherd of 1 [20] 100.4
4 26
Mand.
2, 4-6 5.23
Clement of Rome 6.2.3
9.6
11.8
1 Clem.
13,1
INDEX OF SOURCES
Sim Git.
8.6.4
4:3
Hag.
f 10.1
9.17.4
1:8
Ketub.
Vis.
Po |
Bs | Meg.
1:1
Ned.
Ignatius of Antioch Eph.
1:1
13.1
1:2
Pe'ah 18.2
| Magn.
8:7
Ros Has.
10.3
é Smyrn.
F 1.2
Phid.
1:14 pe Sanh.
5.6
Trall.
10:1
Ta'an.
3.2
56-57 2:9
Yebam.
Justin Martyr 1 Apology 16:7
31.6
TOSEFTA Origen Hul.
2:24
Meg.
Comm. in Matth.
15.14
thn] Menah Ps.-Cyprian 1i3 Ts:i2 Pe'ah Adversus aleatores
, Sentences of Sextus 48, 226
4:8
Sabb.
RABBINIC LITERATURE
'Ne Sotah MISHNAH
7:4
Yebam.
'Abod. Zar.
4:5
4:7
*Abot 2:1
PALESTINIAN TALMUD
4:2
B. Qam.
Ber.
4,4b
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Sanh.
Hag.
92a 1,76c
10la Yebam.
1,76d Ned.
348, 350 47a-b Yoma
9,4lc Pe'ah
9a 1,15d 2,17a Tannaitic Midrashim 8,21la
Mek.
Ta'an. to Ex. 12:4, 6 Sipra
4,68d
to Lev 18:1-5 Sipre
BABYLONIAN TALMUD
B. Bat. to Deut 12:28
1l6a to Deut 13:1
B. Mesi'a to Deut 13:19
96a B. Qam.
OTHER RABBINIC WORKS
38a Ber.
*Abot R. Nat. a2
10b 48a-b
"Abot R. Nat.
Git. b 26 Derek Eres Zuta
56a Hag.
321-22
I-Ill
10b
II, 16-17
1lb VIII, 3 Eikha Rab.
Hor.
8b 2,4 Exod Rab.
Kidd.
4\b Meg.
40:1
Num Rab.
23b Menah.
7:10
Seder Eliahu Rabba
44a 93b
Naz.
12b Ned.
39b 72b Sabb.
Yir'at Het 172, 320
I, 13
321-22
II, 16-17
3la
INDEX OF SOURCES
Cataplus
PAGAN GREEK AND LATIN AUTHORS
201, 229
ARISTOPHANES
15.11
Contemplantes Plutus 549-50
18.10
De mercede conductis
ARISTOTLE
16.9
Dialogi mortuorum Ethica nichomachea
4.7.14-17 Rhetorica 1.4.4 pe.)
8.2.1
30.2.12
Imagines
3.1-3 CICERO 9.24
Menippus
De officiis
3.52
De finibus
De morte Peregrini PAS) 3.64
De legibus
1.23
Piscator
EPICTETUS
34.9
Saturnalia Diatribai II
14.18
Fragments
7.29 ll
Enchiridion 13.5
De 32.20
Somnium HESIOD Opera et dies
287-292
ISOCRATES
PHILOSTRATUS
Ad Demonicum ~~ SS vr @ Vita sophistarum
8-11
Antidosis
PLATO
67-68 Menon
71E Phaedrus
LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA
Apologia
116C 243C
11.35
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Respublica SENECA Epistulae morales 332E 336A Symposium
94.21
94.25
94.32-35 94.43
95.1
74.5.1
124.14-15
203A 203CD
Ps.- DEMETRIUS
De Elocutione
48-50 Tabula Cebetis itil
Ps.-LIBANIUS
XENOPHON
Epistolary styles Memorabilia 2.120-130 342, 344
Rhetorica ad Herennium
2.18, 28
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Ablution 387, 391 Abortion 295 Adultery 194, 316, 319, 324-25, 329Atomistic approach
103, 105, 109, 111-12 Authorship Didache 47-49 30, 332, 334-35, 337-38, 367 Afterlife 231 Alienation 65, 265 Almsgiving 59-60, 119, 222, 239, 279 'anaw / 'anawim 201, 208-9, 211-13, Baptism 7-8, 29-30, 44, 50-53, 62, 67, 118, 127, 131, 165, 186, 192, 199, 239, 250-51, 254, 317, 341, 345, 347-57, 382, 394 Baptismal protrepsis 347 Baptismal formula 348, 351 Baptismal instruction 355, 393 Baptismal rite 350-52 Baptizer 350-51, 353 Bar Kokhba war 92, 100, 101, 108-14 Bar Kokhba letters 110 Beatitudes 221, 223-24 Beggar 149, 193, 204, 206, 216-18 Believer 5, 31, 84, 86, 89, 123-24, 128-29, 146, 170, 187, 191, 226, 243, 268, 291-92, 298-300, 302-6, 311-12, 349, 353, 355, 388, 390, 393-95 Birkat ha-minim 100 Bishop 4, 21, 63, 92, 116, 133, 139, 155,
'anawim piety 219, 221-22 Anger 219, 319, 331-32, 335, 338, 354-55 'ani 205, 207, 209, 211-13, Antioch incident 80-81, 83, 88-89 community 84, 86, 89 hypothesis 21, 32, 80 Antitheses (in Matthew) 7, 131, 187, 246-48, 272, 294, 303, 315-16, 318, 323-30, 335, 338, 356, 367 Apocalyptic discourse 16, 253 Apostle 4, 40, 47, 63, 67, 77-80, 85, 88-90, 93, 118, 120, 133, 139, 147, 149-65, 168, 173-76, 180, 186, 239-40, 254, 264, 295 Apostleship 63, 168 Apostolic council 84-85 161, 163, 166-67, 175-76, 264,
Blasphemy 151, 158, 319 Blessing 65, 67, 141, 143, 152-53, 169, decree 85-86, 120 Apostolicity (of Didache) 48 Aramaic (language) 23-24, 94, 183, 170-71, 205, 222, 232, 273 Bloodshed 82 Breaking of the Bread 52, 67, 394
Armenfrémmigkeit 201-3, 205, 21112, 227, 232 Arrogance 29, 206, 220, 227-28 Canaanite woman 293, 387 Canon (biblical) 99, 109, 314
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
32,118 of the Letter of James 289 Day of judgment 146, 152 Deacon 4, 63, 133, 139, 154-55, 161, Catechesis 51, 143, 175, 240, 346-47, 350, 354, 357 Catechetical instruction 142, 240 Catechetical traditions 171, 253, 355163, 166-67, 175-76, 186, 264, 56, 358 Catechumen 175, 357 (Early) Catholicization 139-40 Charismatic(s) 67, 139-41, 157, 162-
Death of Jesus 59-60, 67, 281, 286, 384, 388, 394-95 Decalogue 6, 143, 189, 192-94, 198, 63; 167,171; 173,175 219, 268, 274, 276, 278-79, 281, Charity 209, 222, 321, 391 Charitable love 6, 276, 278-79, 282 Chief priests 23, 179, 383 Childbirth 81 Children of the kingdom 179, 182 Christian ethics 236, 248, 254 Christology 28, 39, 169, 265, 327, 384, 284, 287, 295-96, 329, 334, 337, 354, 372, 386-88 Demons 38, 144, 146, 151-52, 158, 306, 385 Derek Eres 320-22, 330, 332, 335, 337 Derek Eres tractates 320, 322 Desire 174, 185, 190-92, 227, 243, 319, 394, 395 Church order 48-49 141, 317 Circumcision 29-30, 62, 83, 85-86, 331-32, 335-38, 356, 389, 391-92 Destruction of Jerusalem / temple 15100, 120, 199, 315 Codex Hierosolymitanus 54 46, 49 Commensality 58, 83, 86 Communal meal 44, 50-53, 55, 64, 67 Compassion 149, 209, 303 Completeness 298-300, 355 Concatenation 332 Concern for the poor 6, 205, 227, 276, 16, 24, 62, 92, 97-98, 101, 105-6, 262, 289, 362, 370, 380, 383, 395 Devil 245 Diatribe 36, 120, 359 Diaspora / Dispersion 5, 34, 85, 109, 112, 120, 130, 133, 149, 166, 168, 172, 180-82, 231, 236, 259, 266, 268-69, 291, 293, 297, 298-99, 313-14, 376, 380 303, 307 Confession of sins 39, 52, 382, 393 Conflict Disciples of Jesus 23, 30, 131, 141-53, 154-55, 173-75, 178-79, 183-84, 187-88, 272, 286, 393, 328, 330, with formative Judaism 4, 18-19, 21-22, 25, 27-28, 32, 89, 117 with Pharisees 22-23, 26, 107, 335, 352, 356, 369, 370-73, 385-
Discipleship 146, 312 Discrimination 187, 192, 306, 309 (The) Dispossessed 211, 225 Dissension(s) 169 Divorce 147, 324, 326, 370 Double love command 6-7, 196, 263, 117-19, 277 with Rome 15-16, 24-25 Conversion 88-89, 348, 355, 394 Covenant 292, 366, 381, 384 Creation (biblical) 60, 302, 348-49,
Crucifixion of Jesus 384 278, 282-83 Double-minded 190, 192, 303-5, 355 Double-hearted 304 Double-tongued 305 Date of Matthew's gospel 13, 15-19, 21,
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
'ebyon | ebyénim 205, 207-8, 212, 215 Eighteen Benedictions 100, 116, 119 Ekklesia 5, 149, 264 Elders (group of) 35, 155, 168, 172Fasting 51-52, 55-60, 65, 119, 131,
239, 251-54, 346 Fast days 57 Favoritism 193, 273, 284, 306, 309,
73, 175-76, 179-80 Election 166, 204, 245, 279 Eloquence 170 End time 294 Endurance 224, 242-43, 245 Envy 170, 243, 337, 359, 391 Erés 217 Eschatology 170, 327, 349 Eschatological age 185, 191, 198-99, Eschatological discourse 251, 253-54 Firstfruits 161, 184, 193, 218, 291, 298,
Food laws 79, 81-83, 296 Forgiveness 52, 82, 191, 210, 214, 225, 251, 282, 303, 353, 381, 382, 384 Formative Judaism 16, 18-19, 21-22, 25, 27-28, 32, 89, 117, 266 Fornication 319, 337, 371 Friendship with God 184, 192, 280, 289, 292-93, 297-98, 304-5, 311, 336, 392 Friendship with the world 171, 184, 192, 245, 280, 292, 298, 304-5, 311, 336, 392 Ethics 2, 7, 34, 38, 40-41, 44, 134, 193,
236, 241, 247-48, 253-54, 262, 264, 266-67, 269-70, 290, 293, 320, 388, 392 Ethical admonitions 7, 290, 297, 301, 303-7, 312-13 Ethical behavior 388, 395 Ethical literature 41 Ethical norms 37, 51, 388 Ethical radicalism 250, 254 Ethical directives 5, 7, 36, 37, 40-41, Galilean hypothesis 22, 24-25 Generosity 63, 176, 207, 244, 300 Gentile Christians 3, 25, 115-16, 12021, 129 Gentile mission 29-31, 148, 235 Gentle 166, 170-71, 213, 215, 222, 224, 48, 51, 54, 65-66, 131, 134, 143, 226-27, 294 God-Fearer 67, 267 Golden Rule 6, 55, 196, 249, 282-83 Gospel of the Ebionites 124-25 Gospel of the Nazoraeans 124 Grace (of God) 184, 389-90 Greek (language) 3, 21, 23-24, 69, 94, 183, 199, 211, 241, 248, 253-54, 263, 265-66, 269, 273-74, 286, 290, 295, 297, 301, 303, 305, 3067, 312-13, 316, 322-23, 334, 338, 342-43, 345, 371-72, 388, 391 Eucharist 49, 59-60, 118, 160, 166, 181, 186, 197, 239-40, 249-50, 251-52, 254, 264, 349, 393 Eucharistic prayers 181, 186, 240, 249, 96, 108, 116, 121, 178, 183, 216, 22272317 304, 310,317, 2367373;
Greek Two Ways 51, 317, 318, 322 252, 349, 394 Exhortation 50, 193, 196-97, 219, 240, 246-50, 283, 308, 337, 342, 345Halaka 85, 96, 111, 321, 334-35, 36246, 353-56, 391 63, 368, 373-74, 376-77 Hasidim 209, 320, 335 Hatred 162, 281, 324 Exile 92-93, 97, 101, 104-5, 208-9,
Exorcism 151, 153, 173
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Jesus-believing Jews 79, 81, 84, 86, 89 Healing 68, 133, 153, 173, 180, 381, 384-85 Hellenization 108 Hierarchisation 129, 132 High Priests 61, 373 Holiness 83, 298, 302, 380, 394 Homelessness 147 Jesus movement 3, 5, 74-75, 79, 81, 83-86, 88-90, 203-4, 211-12, 217-18, 225 Jewish leaders 6, 114, 262-63 Jewish war 3, 15, 16-18, 21, 24, 30, 89,
Jewish Christians 1, 3, 6, 26, 30, 66, 92, 100, 107, 115-18, 120-21, 126, 128, 133, 134, 197, 261, 296 Judaizers 25, 92, 120 Hospitality 50, 63, 118, 149, 152, 156,
Household 5, 147-48, 224-25, 232 Humility 176, 202, 204, 208-13, 220, 228, 267, 321, 392 Hybris 206, 219 Hypocrites 119, 239, 250, 251-52, 254, Kiddush ha-Shem 115 Last Supper 59, 66, 251, 382-84 Law of liberty 192 Leper 151, 384-85, 395 Leprosy 380 260, 264 Identity 4, 7-8, 34, 37, 51, 58, 94, 98,
106, 115, 127-31, 135, 140, 142, Levites 88, 208, 219, 373 Light commandments 319-20, 328,
Liminality 343-45 (The) Lord's name 351 Lord's Prayer 58-59, 238-39, 251, 254, 177, 180, 182, 209, 217, 252, 287, 289, 290-93, 297, 300, 301, 304, 307-8, 312-13, 359 Christian identity 4, 6, 52, 91, 116, 140, 182, 203, 235, 237 identity markers 128-29, 144, 146, 236 Jewish identity 6, 89-90, 189, 235-36, 254 Jewish-Christian identity 129 non-Jewish ethnic identity 86, 89-90, Idolatry 82, 84-85, 89, 197, 298, 319 Imitation of God 7, 299, 301-3 Imitation of Jesus 7, 303 Immersion 82, 351, 380, 382 Impurity 3, 81-83, 85-86, 89-90, 96,
Love Command 6, 192, 195, 271-87, 305, 333, 334 Love of God 277, 295, 307 Love of neighbor 295, 306-7 Magic (practice of) 295 Major commandments 319, 327, 333,
Major transgression 319, 322, 338 Macarism 143, 146, 171 Market 55-57 Market days 55-57 Meal prayers 60, 67 Mercy 170-71, 188, 191, 219, 277, 279, 380-81, 386-88, 395 moral impurity 3, 82-86, 89-90 ritual impurity 81-83 Isotimia 230-31 Itinerant messengers 44, 52, 69, 141, 282, 303, 307 Messiah 30, 83, 88, 90, 92, 115, 169, 162, 176, 186, 225 183, 289, 295, 297, 312, 362, 395 Mild 166, 213, 222 Jealousy 337
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Minim 100, 115 Minor commandments 188, 320, 333- (The) Perfect 5, 7, 68, 79, 86, 88, 144,
169, 181-82, 186-98, 242-52, 275, 35, 338 Minor transgression 319, 322, 334,
Minyan 172 Modesty 321 Monotheism 38, 267 Moral impurity 3, 82-83, 85-86, 89296, 297, 299-303, 307, 328, 350 Perfect law 120, 192-93, 195-96, 267, 292, 390-91 Perfection 4, 5, 38, 68, 177, 186, 19098, 241-55, 268, 276-78, 285-86, 287, 298, 315, 328, 338, 355, 358,
Perjury 324, 335 Persecution 16, 30, 98, 143-44, 151-
Murder 99, 194, 219, 316, 319, 324, 329, 333-38, 371, 392 Mystery of the church 161, 181 52, 243, 357 Pharisees 4, 18, 21-23, 26, 65, 84, 94, 99. 103, 107, 117-19, 131, 132, Name of Jesus 127, 146, 302, 350-53 Name of the Lord 145, 172-73, 186, 350-53 Normativity 50 148, 150, 158-59, 175, 178-79, 184, 188-89, 195, 235, 244, 248, 252, 254, 260, 262, 272-73, 277, 315, 328, 330, 383, 386-87 Pharisaism 18, 263 Pharisaic movement 179, 199 Oath 8, 247-48, 310, 325, 326, 330, 335, 364-71, 375-76 Piety 1, 5, 56-60, 62, 66, 201-5, 208false oath 325-26, 367-68, 371
Oath-formula 366 15 219, 221-222 227225 252; 262-365 Oil (anointing with) 68, 172-73, 176, (The) Pious 5, 7, 56, 113, 201-3, 208-9,
OA 1632221 3167920, 32255329,
180, 352 Optimates 265 Ordination 166 Orphans 35, 279, 292, 302-3, 366, 391-92 Overseer 52, 166-67, 358
(The) Poor 5, 6, 35, 36, 38, 149, 152, 156, 189, 192-94, 201-32, 241, 245, 246, 265, 275-76, 278-79, 280, 299, 302, 303, 305-7, 309, 333-34, 389, 391-92 Paradeigma 343, 346 Paraenesis 7, 8, 50, 167, 169, 277, 282, destitute 5, 149, 204, 215-17, 231 indigent 204, 232 working poor 204, 210, 216-17, 341-48, 353-59 Partiality 6, 170, 192-94, 220, 279, 332-34 Parting of the Ways 233, 254, 312, 370 Patience 168, 219, 390 Patriarchate 97, 99 Patronage 204, 232 Pederasty 295 Penia 216-17 Pentateuch 363, 365, 370
Poverty 5, 201-25, 227, 232 spiritual poverty 202, 211-12 Prayer 39, 51-52, 55, 58-62, 67, 94, 100, 119, 131, 135, 172-73, 176, 180-82, 186, 191, 239, 251-54, 260, 304-5, 346, 350, 352-53, 375 Pre-baptismal instruction 51, 249, 288, 317, 341, 346-47, 353-59
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Rabbinic tradition 99, 108, 112, 266, Predators 145, 151 Priest 61-62, 87-88, 210, 219, 230, 322, 363 Radicalization 7, 89, 277, 316, 325, 373-74, 384 Priesthood 208, 374 Prohibition of oaths 8, 247-48, 325, 335, 338 Rebirth 348, 353, 354-55 Repentance 336, 382 Representatives of the Lord 355, 357 Resurrection 143, 150, 169, 260, 266,
Prophecy 61, 143, 146, 149, 151, 153, 159-60, 168, 209, 374, 382-83 Prophet(s) 4, 39, 61-64, 118-19, 133, 302, 311, 395 Retaliation 324, 326 (The) Rich 5, 6, 35, 127, 130, 192-93, 139, 143, 144-48, 150-76, 181, 186, 199, 218, 235, 239, 254, 264, 201-7, 212, 214, 216-17, 219-20, 227-32, 245, 265, 267, 275, 279, 292, 299, 305-7, 333, 349, 367, 389-92 Rich young man 147, 189, 241, 246, 274, 276, 299, 300, 307 Righteousness 144, 148, 165, 170-71, 277, 283, 291, 294, 307, 324, 358, 373-74, 384 false prophet(s) 144-48, 151, 153, 156-57, 159-62, 165, 173, 175, 181, 199, 226, 252 true prophet(s) 144-47, 151, 15759, 1615873 Proselyte baptism 348, 350 Protreptic 342-45, 358 Purification rituals 82 Purification period 380 Purity 3, 8, 40, 62, 81, 85-86, 171, 292,
173, 175, 188, 205, 213-14, 222, 235, 246, 248, 252, 254, 272, 276, 291, 294, 315, 324, 328, 330, 332,
Roman imperialism 16 Roman army 24 Roman Empire 3, 20, 57, 91, 106, 114, 298, 370, 379-81, 383-95 purity rules 62, 81-83, 96, 99, 102, 125, 259 Roman governor 29 Roman occupation 29, 98-99 Roman soldiers 29 Roman war 92, 100, 115 Romans 24, 48, 92, 98-99, 101, 107, 292, 298, 301, 304, 379, 380, 386-87 purity observance 62, 277, 292,
cultic / ritual purity 66, 81-84, 384-85, 389, 391, 395 moral purity 86, 89 113-14, 120, 243-344, 260, 270 Rome 3, 15-16, 28-29, 91, 98-99, 107, Qorban 369 Q Tradition 167, 174-75, 244, 246 115-16, 121, 149 Royal law 68, 120, 194-95, 278, 292, 306, 308-9, 332-33 Rabbinic Judaism 7, 18, 92, 316, 320 Rabbinic halakah 111 Rabbinic leadership 3, 101, 114 Rabbinic literature 94, 103-4, 113, 115,
Sabbath 113, 156, 277, 363, 370 Sabbatical year 113, 205 (The) Sacred 82, 381 117, 320, 356, 363-64 Rabbinic movement 112-13, 362, 367, Sacrifice 61-62, 166, 210, 277, 380, 384-85, 388, 394-95 370, 373 Sacrificial meat 67, 381
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Sacrificial rites 384 Sinfulness 381, 384 Single-minded 304-5 Sages 7, 93, 100, 150-51, 153, 174-75, 316, 320, 337, 369, Slave 154, 168, 175, 224, 228, 305 Son of David 141, 383 Son of God 178, 385, 388, 395 Soteriology 241 Speech ethics 375 Salvation 37, 65, 169, 179, 184, 186, 191, 199, 252, 286, 311, 313, 362.
382, 388 Sanctity (God's) 326, 369, 375 Sanctification 115, 375, 391-92 Sanhedrin 22, 99, 149 Schism 165, 265 Spirit 61, 86, 114, 140, 151, 153, 15759, 163-64, 166, 171-74, 176, 185, 199, 202, 206, 226-27, 243, 289, 290, 300, 307, 351-52 Stoicism 267, 269 Stoic ethic 269 Subordinationism 94 Swearing 8, 248, 325-26, 365, 367-69,
Scribe 147-48 Scribes and Pharisees 18, 21, 23, 117, 131-32, 150, 175, 252, 254, 260, 262, 272, 315, 328, 330 Second table of the Decalogue 189, 192, 194, 198, 281, 329, 386, 307 Sectio evangelica 5, 49, 241, 247, 249, Sygkrisis 204-5, 231 Symposia 59 Synagogue 55, 84-85, 87, 100, 106, 253-54, 284-86, 310, 358 Self-humiliation 392 Self-mastery 87 Septuagint 2, 38-41, 146, 178, 180, 108, 132, 135, 150, 166, 172, 180.
234-35, 248, 252, 254, 268, 28687, 294, 312, 354, 379 Synoptic apocalypse 119 Synoptic Gospels 41, 236-40, 244-45, 183, 187, 193-94, 217, 245, 298, 300, 302, 308-9 Sermon on the Mount 7, 18, 131, 142250-53, 285, 299 Synoptic tradition 5, 64, 66, 68, 118, 44, 146-47, 151, 171, 174, 188, 190, 241, 248, 263, 280, 299, 303, 237, 240-41, 244-45, 249, 252305, 309-10, 314-16, 318, 324-29, 354, 271 369, 388 Sermon on the Plain 299, 323 Servant 52, 140, 154, 166, 169, 175, Table fellowship 56, 62, 65-66, 83, 85,
Talmudic age 96-97, 104 Talmudic literature 102, 111-12 Tannaitic literature 364, 366 Tannaitic period 87, 97, 322, 380 Tax collector 154, 178, 187, 195, 244 Taxes 229, 262 Teacher 4, 35, 40-41, 61, 64, 80, 87, 185, 240 Servant of the Lord 208 (The) Seventy 150, 153 Sexual intercourse 81 Sexual immorality 85 Shaliah 149 Sheep 144-45, 148-49, 151, 162, 165, 174, 179, 293, 387 Shema Israel 293, 306 Sickness 151, 156, 229 90, 96, 133, 139, 140, 147-49, 152, 155, 162-76, 183-86, 198, 215, 220, 262, 264, 267, 295, 343, 358Sin 38, 82, 151, 158, 191-92, 214, 222,
59, 369-70, 376 243, 281, 311, 319, 330-34, 33637, 355-56,
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Two Ways document / section / passage / tractate 51, 218-19, 241, 247, Teaching 4-6, 37, 47, 49, 50-51, 55, 63-66, 79, 87, 95-96, 131-32, 134, 249, 251, 254, 295-96, 311, 317, 345, 355 Two Ways instruction / teaching / doctrine 50-51, 165, 238, 249-50, 254, 139, 142-44, 147-50, 154-56, 160, 162-76, 178, 184, 197, 211, 220, 226, 238, 239-40, 248-50, 253-54, 260-62, 289, 293, 295, 300, 303, 306-10, 313-14, 316-18, 320, 323, 330-31, 335, 338, 343-44, 346, 282-83, 285, 295, 310, 318, 393 Two Ways scheme 55 Two Ways stratum 266 Two Ways source 155, 166 359, 363-64, 368-69, 370-76, 386, 388, 393-94 Teknon section 7, 316, 320, 322, 331Unction 40
Undivided speech 375 Unity of the Torah 194, 219 32, 334, 336-38,
Temple 16, 23, 61-62, 82, 92, 97, 98, 105-6, 221, 263, 289, 362-63, 367, 369-70, 379-80, 383-85, 395 Temptation(s) 185, 191-92, 243-44, 389-90 Test (of authenticity) 4, 145, 159, 161,
Validity of the Torah 78-79, 81, 90, 324, 367-68 Vow 208, 326, 363-71, 375-76 Vow-formula 366 165, 171, 176, 277 Testing (of authenticity) 158, 166, Wandering charismatics 140 War of Quietus 100 Way of death 219, 317, 329 Way of life (opposite Way of death) 353-54, 356-57 Thanksgiving 49, 52, 61, 239, 251 Theft 319, 371 Tolerance 84, 121 Tongue (as evil) 169-70, 172, 174, 192, 191, 282, 300-301, 317, Wealth 36, 166, 173, 203, 206-7, 211, 286, 336, 389 Traders 35-36, 57, 209 Traditionskreis 346-47, 353 Trespasses 252, 303 215, 218-219, 224-25, 228, 23032, 241, 245, 279, 281, 300, 305 (The) Wealthy 22, 130, 193, 202, 20910, 214, 219, 220, 228, 307 Weighty commandments Trial 242-43, 245, 267, 354, 357, 384 Trinity 350-351 Trinitarian formula 351 Truthfulness 176 328-39, 334-35 Widow(s) 35, 205, 260, 279, 292, 3023, 366, 391-92 Wisdom 4-5, 38, 75, 121, 150-51, 170-73, 184, 190, 191-92, 205-6, 226, 236, 243-47, 253-54, 311, 313, 336, 372, 376 Wisdom literature 206, 236, 243, 392 Works (ethos) 120, 169, 170, 192, 222, (The) Twelve 147, 149-51, 153, 156, 168, 175, 211, 293, 295 Twelve apostles 180, 295 Twelve disciples 150, 183 Twelve thrones 147, 294 Twelve-tribe Kingdom 169, 290, 29193, 299, 304, 308-9, 313 Twelve tribes 34, 36, 40, 120, 147, 175,
225-26, 236, 242-43, 305-6, 311, 313, 375 180-81, 236, 287, 290-91, 293-94, 295, 297-99, 314
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Worship 40, 79, 163, 196, 298, 314, Zionism 98, 103 379-80, 381, 391, 393, 395 Zweistufenethik 189, 197, 199 Wholeness 298-301, 375-76 Wolves 144-45, 151, 162, 165, 174 Yavneh period 107, 109, 113-14 Yoke of the Lord 5, 68, 79, 88, 161, 170, 181, 186, 196, 238, 249-50, 254, 296, 300, 318, 373 Yoke of slavery 296
arn ree = i ie penctkt )s 02s air gee | TH CO ut rs :
© Ot coe 11. eee Sere s Dit ae bh Sette elle ay ?
'po Dap * (ae ilies 21 aa Cily NO dain
} '—Y 2 ei ite eed gat os we Teer | aie :
'we eign Ie _ (un itl, Mend te sie oe iii) ape B72"; 'i : my Of Op Fated See 2S '44, Petite lead Tv 34: oe >» fa \ Vou 2a ee oe urate Mai:
AP :
— as , 1%.
2eh, yf. as ot eee _ mr,
a >, EPS:
Ve —
TT oe j ' ee ry] we oe SHE 2 > : a eh dames ne, ween ip
Wy ae SE Soe be i.
Li ta, tans, a oerAP NT , } Raabe = - | TRSPA ge i'. ya > "Gy i+ i ) oe "sel Diet, 3000 phd, jane en :
7) aig on Sei '
digas tye ° a nee enw 49. ben. 4} yma (25 271.24) Fes) 0 ch ent Speaiia' s0ttane 4 a } ving af a Boys | ts. iad
INDEX OF ANCIENT PERSONAL NAMES
(Abbot) Vita 164 (Abbot) Shenudi 164 Abraham 339, 141, 185, 228, 268 Agamemnon 228 Josephus 24, 87, 93, 261, 263 Megapenthes 228-29 Menippus 231 Micyllus 228-29 (Prophet) Nathan 291 Nicephorus 155 Noetus of Smyrna 17 Origen 116 Papias of Hierapolis 13, 45, 361 (Rabbi) Akiba 98, 100, 110-11, 113, 149, 260 Bar Kokhba 92, 98, 100, 101, 108-14,
Ben Kosiba, see: Bar Kokhba Charon 228 Cicero 268-69 Clement of Alexandria 41, 47, 269 Clotho 228 Constantine 259 Cronos 230 Cronosolon 230 Cyniscus 228 David 23, 141, 185, 291, 295, 383 Dio Cassius 108, 113 Domitian 116 (Pophet) Elijah 172-73, 176 Epictetus 268 Eusebius of Caesarea 92-94 Gamliel the Younger 98-99, 100, 107, Paul 7, 25, 31, 48, 53, 63-64, 67, 73-74,
80, 83, 85-86, 88-90, 93, 117-18, 120, 128, 156, 157-58, 168-69, 236-39, 245, 278, 281, 296, 302, 311-12, 314 Peter 21, 25, 41, 80, 83, 85, 120, 143, 153-54, 157, 174-75, 178, 367 Petronius 228 Philo of Alexandria 87, 93, 268, 302, 363, 365-66, 368, 382 Pilate 23, 118, 179 Ps.-Athanasius 94, 155 Ps.-Cyprian 155 Rahab 39, 268 Rhadamanthos 229 Rufinus 155 Seneca 268, 343-44 Tiberius 259 Trajan 17,92, 100 Trimalchio 228 Valentinus 17 (Rabbi) Yishmael 88 116, 118-19 Gamliel the Elder 366 Hadrian 92, 100, 110, 113 Helen of Troy 231 Hermes 228 Ignatius of Antioch 16-17, 19, 21, 2526, 44, 64, 68-69, 89, 116, 118, 171 Johanan ben Torta 115 Johanan ben Zakkai 18, 98, 107
< "=, bh "wey . oe {> an * —— O21 Chi BF . od » ci A ay A olla Ct t en Ny ~~ was if Wey —— to U ngdeaee Mae + nC hot SG <8 Ait ia '
H rie a i
te Ge -" ats } Ae r
\w ie oe i eV ~ if '4?
= ; os46a.¥ ( si ory toe sions oun el al? bo oa b+ aulenrgs A 9 <i ae See BO 95 Sead 1° voted RS ie ae 0 witelt 4 Oot ees peel <s
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS
Baudissin, Wolf W. Graf 209 Bauer, Walter 93, 183, 187, 386, 389,
Bazzana, Giovanni B. 224
Beardsley, Monroe C. 73
Beare, Francis W. 325
Becker, Hans-Jiirgen 369 Ben-Haim Trifon, Dalia 111 Berger, Peter L. 292
Berner, Ulrich 37 Allison Jr., Dale C. 221, 292, 300 Al(ijon, Gedalyahu 3, 93, 95-112, 115-16, 373 Amélineau, Emile C. 164
Anderson, Hugh 319 Appelbaum, Shimon 110, 114, 116 Betz, Hans Dieter 81, 144, 318, 323, 326, 329, 346 Binder, Donald D. 87
Bloomquist, L. Gregory 217 Bohl, Felix 322 Booth, Roger P. 379
Bornkamm, Giinther 146, 323 Bradshaw, Paul F. 352
Brandon, Samuel G.F. 20
Braumann, Georg 347, 355 Broer, Ingo 272, 318 Brown, Delwin 203 Brown, Raymond E. 20, 45, 78, 142, Assmann, Jan 308 Atchley, Edward G. C. F. 350, 352 Attridge, Harold W. 305
Audet, Jean-Paul 46, 160, 201, 218-20,
Aune, David E. 28, 61, 373 Austin, John L. 344
Baarda, Tjitze 206
Bultmann, Rudolph 95, 325, 326 Burchard, Christoph 35-36, 40-41, Bacher, Wilhelm 320 Bacon, Benjamin W. 20
Baer, Yizhak 333 Bagatti, Bellarmino 124 Baker, William R. 40, 375 Baldwin, Barry H. 230
Bammel, Ernst 202, 213 234, 236, 238, 243, 247, 272, 277, 279, 287, 325 Burgess, Theodore C. 342
Byrne, Brendan 30 Barclay, John M. G. 116
Baron, Salo W. 93
Bauckham, Richard J. 13-15, 41, 120Callan, Terrance 85 Campenhausen, Hans F. von 350 Cargal, Timothy B. 384, 390 21, 204, 228, 234, 238
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Eberhart, Christian 384 Eckstein, Hans-Joachim 272 Edgar, David H. 168-69 Edwards, Mark J. 17
Ehrman, Bart D. 295
Eichholz, Georg 325-26 Engberg-Pedersen, Troels 342-44 Epstein, J. N. 96, 102, 108 Eshel, Hanan 112-13 Carleton Paget, James 123, 125-27 Carrington, Philip 353, 357 Carter, Warren 20, 29-30 Causse, Antonin 210, 219 Charles, J. Daryl 272 Charlesworth, James H. 206, 291, 294, 319, 372 Cheung, Luke L. 187, 190 Cohen, Shaye J.D. 84, 370 Connolly, Richard H. 220
Conzelmann, Hans 167 Cooper, R. M. 316
Crosby, Michael 224 Crossan, John D. 217
Crossley, James G. 16
Crouzel, Henri 302 Esler, Philip F. 15, 81, 85 Evans, Craig A. 95, 238, 292, 316, 326,
Ewherido, Anthony O. 19-20, 28 Fiedler, Peter 276, 362 Finkelstein, Louis 96, 98, 114, 320 Fish, Stanley 73 Fleischer, Ezra 100 Daniélou, Jean 126 Flusser, David 50-51, 54, 78, 85, 87Davids, Peter H. 202, 227, 315, 326,
89, 118, 140, 171, 196, 231, 235, 239-40, 246, 249-50, 252, 283, 285-86, 296-97, 311, 317, 320, 322-24, 324, 329, 345, 373-74,
Follesdal, Dagfinn 75-76
Davies, William D.
18-20, 23-24, 27-28, 78, 88, 98, 114, 125, 221, 223-24, 299-300, 324-28, 357, 382-84, 386 Deines, Roland 235, 275, 278 Delling, Gerhard 187, 382 Del Verme, Marcello 57, 60-61, 65, Foster, Paul 28, 133, 235 France, Richard T. 15
Frankemdlle, Hubert 38-39, 177, 184, 118-19, 235, 252, 371, 373 Deppe, Dean B. 315-16 Descamps, Albert 328 Dibelius, Martin 120, 167-69, 201-2, 236, 247, 272, 375-76, 389 Friedlander, Gerald 318, 329 Friedmann, Meir 321 Fung, Ronald Y. K. 81
Funk, Franz X. 323
227, 278, 280, 291, 333, 342, 346 Dietzfelbinger, Christian 272 Donfried, Karl P. 225
Douglas, Mary T. 230-31, 379-80 Draper, Jonathan A. 4, 58, 60, 65-66, Gafni, Isaiah 93, 112, 320 Gager, John G, 74 77-81, 85-86, 88, 90, 139-40, 142-44, 150, 152, 157, 161, 165, Gale, Aaron M. 19, 21-24 Gammie, John G. 343-44 Garcia Martinez, Florentino 215, 221, 167, 197, 233-35, 239, 249-50, 252, 283, 285-86, 288, 295, 301, 308, 347, 361, 373, 392 Dunn, James D. G. 81, 238, 312 Dupont, Jacques 302, 328
Garleff, Gunnar 4, 44, 46, 53, 66, 12833, 135, 140, 142, 155-56, 234, 286-87, 341, 348, 354, 358
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS
Garrow, Alan 142, 155, 233, 271, 374 Gelin, Albert 211-12 Gemiinden, Petra von 193, 243, 280,
George, Augustin 211-12 Herr, Moshe D. 108
Hertig, Paul 21-22 Hertzberg, Arthur 98 Hezser, Catherine 119 Higger, Michael 321-22 Hirshman, Mare 87-88 Hock, Ronald F. 358
Hoffmann, Paul 223-23, 309 Hoppe, Rudolf 276, 278 Horbury, William 117, 125 Hiibner, Reinhard M. 17
Hummel, Reinhart 325 Hurd, John C. 85
Hvalvik, Reidar 123-24 Giet, Stanislas 323 Gnilka, Joachim 20, 329, 384 Goldsworthy, Adrian 114 Good, Edwin M. 168
Goodenough, Erwin R. 104
Goodman, Martin 114 Goppelt, Leonhard 323, 325 Graetz, Heinrich 93, 208 Green, William S. 259
Gregory, Andrew 77-78, 152 Gruen, Erich S. 261
Gryglewicz, Feliks 316 Guelich, Robert 223, 326-29 Gundry, Robert H. 13, 15, 20, 28, 179, Ilan, Tal 92, 99, 103, 109 Isaac, Benjamin 92, 101, 111-13 Jackson—McCabe, Matt 123, 126-27,
Gussmann, Oliver 61 Guthrie, George H. 331
169, 190, 267-68, 292, 331, 336 Jaffé, Dan 116 Jaubert, Annie 57 Jefford, Clayton N. 44-45, 67, 69, 78, Haacker, Klaus 367 Haar Romeny, Bas ter 45, 65, 234 Hadas, Moses 269 Hagner, Donald A. 20, 28 385 Hamel, Gildas H. 217
Hands, Arthur R. 216
Hare, Douglas R.A. 28
Harnack, Adolf von 45, 53, 109, 139, 89, 167, 218, 235, 240, 283-85, 323, 347, 372 Johnson, Luke T. 40, 180, 193, 284, 306, 316, 330, 334, 336-37, 389-
Jonge, Marinus de 51, 55, 61 Jénsson, Jakob 168 Kaestli, Jean-Daniel 126
Harrington, Daniel J. 19, 21-22, 28 Harrington, Hannah K. 381
Hartin, Patrick J.
Karrer, Martin 189, 275, 369, 376 Katz, Steven T. 98, 114 Kazen, Thomas 380 Keck, Leander, E. 294
Keener, Craig S. 19-20 Kehrer, Giinther 37 Keith, Pierre 194-95 Kellermann, Ulrich 275 Kelly, Francis X. 228
Kennard, J. Spencer 20 Kilpatrick, George D. 20
7, 68, 168, 170, 190, 289-93, 29899, 306, 308-9, 315, 334, 376, 388 Hartman, Lars 346, 349-51, 353 Harvey, A. E. 224
Hasitschka, Martin 384 Hauck, Friedrich 226 Hayes, Christine E. 82-83, 381 Heinemann, Isaak 319
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Loopik, Marcus van 321-22 Louw, Johannes P. 177
Luck, Ulrich 275, 278 Luckmann, Thomas 292 Ludwig, Martina 278 Liihrmann, Dieter 273 Luomanen, Petri 20, 28, 127, 179, 328 Luz, Ulrich 20, 28, 58, 141-44, 225, Kimbrough, S. T. 211
Kinzig, Wolfram 124 Kittel, Gerhard 315 Klassen, William 273 Klauck, Hans-Josef 37 Klawans, Jonathan 81-83 Klein, Gottlieb 322 Klein, Martin 190, 278, 376 Klijn, Albertus F. J. 124, 294 Klinghardt, Matthias 59-60 Klink, Edward W. 15
Kloner, Amos 108, 111-12 Kloppenborg, John S. 5, 49, 68, 77, 201, 247, 272, 277, 325, 327-28, 361,
MacLennan, Robert S. 268
MacMullen, Ramsay 261 Maier, Johann 363 Malherbe, Abraham J. 342-46 Malina, Bruce J. 34, 36, 298 Manns, Frédéric 124 Mansoor, Menahem 215 Martin, Ralph P. 202, 280, 341, 348, 210, 218, 223-24, 231, 238, 252, 283-86, 309-10, 331, 361, 372 Klostermann, Erich 325 Konradt, Matthias 6, 41, 189, 235-36, 242-44, 246-47, 271-74, 277-78, 280, 284, 286-88, 327, 333, 368, 356, 358, 390, 392 Martin, Raymond A. 167
Marxsen, Willi 318 Massebieau, Louis 318 Mathys, Hans-Peter 274 Mayor, Joseph B. 304, 337 McCown, Chester C. 216
McKnight, Scott 28, 292, 376
Kraft, Heinrich 139-40 Krauss, Samuel 117 Kretschmar, Georg 161 Kiimmel, Werner G. 325-26, 379 Kiinzel, Georg 20 Kiirzinger, Joseph 361 Kuhn, Heinz-Wolfgang 272 Kuschke, Anton 212 Meier, John P. 20, 23-26, 45, 78, 142, 324, 327-28, 382 Lambrecht, Jan 325 Laws, Sophie 181, 267, 301 Layton, Bentley 47, 49 Lechner, Thomas 17 Lerner, Myron B. 320-21 Meiser, Martin 189, 275-76 Meisinger, Hubert 275, 280 Menirav, Joseph 55-57 Menken, Maarten J. J. 325
Merklein, Helmut 326 Milavec, Aaron 46, 53, 88, 159-60, Levine, Lee I. 21, 87 Levison, John R. 324
Levy, Gershon 93, 100, 102, 105 167, 271, 283, 285, 348, 350, 392 Milgrom, Jacob 379 Millar, Fergus G.B. 107-8 Mimouni, Simon C. 124-28 Mitchell, Margaret 15 Lilje, Hanns 323 Lindemann, Andreas 17 Loeb, Isidore 202, 208 Lohr, Hermut 276 Lohfink, Gerhard 208 Lohse, Eduard 325 Mitchell, Nathan 347, 349, 353 Mitternacht, Dieter 84 Montefiore, Claude G. 318
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS
Moo, Douglas J. 333-34 Moore, George F. 320
Muecke, Douglas C. 168
Murphy, Catherine M. 215
Murray, Michele 84 Mussner, Franz 348, 350, 357, 379 Rahlfs, Alfred 208-9 Rappaport, Uriel 93, 108, 111 Reinbold, Wolfgang 235 Reinink, Gerrit J. 124
Repschinski, Boris 8, 19, 28, 67, 379 > 382-84, 386, 393 Reventlow, Henning Graf 275 Reydams-Schils, Gretchen J. 267
Nanos, Mark D. 83-86, 89 Nepper-Christensen, Poul 349, 351, Riches, John K. 28-29, 379 Robinson, James M. 223-24, 309 Rogoznitzky, Gedaliah 95 Roloff, Jiirgen 64 Ropes, James H. 337, 359 Rordorf, Willy 47-48, 155, 285, 288, ae ow
Neusner, Jacob 18-19, 96, 102, 104, 109-11, 117, 214, 363, 379-80 Nickelsburg, George W. E. 214
Nida, Eugene A. 177
Niebuhr, Karl-Wilhelm 272, 371 Niederwimmer, Kurt 45-49, 51, 54347, 351 Rosenfeld, Ben-Zion 55-57 Rosivach, Vincent J. 217-218, 220 Rouwhorst, Gerard 58-60 Ruzer, Serge 329 57, 66, 68-69, 155, 161, 218-221, 239-40, 249-50, 252, 282-86, 305, 307, 393-94 Nolland, John L. 15, 362, 369-70 Novakovic, Lidija 382 Oppenheimer, Aharon 92-93, 101-2, Sanger, Dieter 41, 189, 235, 272, 275, 277, 327, 368 108, 110-13, 320, 380 Osborne, Robert E. 20, 28 Overman, J. Andrew 6, 19, 21-24, 27Safrai, Shmuel 3, 96, 99-102, 115, 320
Safrai, Ze'ev 112 Saldarini, Anthony J. 19, 21-23, 27-30, 30, 78, 89, 116-119, 259-62, 268,
89, 143, 263, 362 Sand, Alexander 275, 387 Sanders, Ed P. 62, 74, 81-82, 379-380 Sandt, Huub van de 1, 7, 26, 44-45, Paschen, Wilfried 379 49-51, 54, 58, 60, 62, 65, 78, 85, 88, Patte, Daniel 386 Penner, Todd C. 170
Percy, Ernst 318 Perdue, Leo 343-44, 354 Piper, John 274 115, 118-19, 140, 171, 196, 218, 221, 233-35, 239-40, 246, 249, 250, 252, 265-66, 283, 285-87, 295-97, 301, 310-311, 315, 317, 320, 322-24, 329, 332, 337, 345, Pleins, J. David 207-9, 212-13 Popkes, Wiard 9, 38-39, 41, 168, 234, 356, 362-63, 373-74, 391, 393 Satlow, Michael L. 109
Schafer, Peter 103, 108-9, 111-12, 114 Schechter, Solomon 322 Schenker, Adrian 379, 381 Schermann, Theodor 282 Schlecht, Joseph 282 236, 247, 278, 315, 342-43, 348, 353-54, 356-57, 359 Popper, Karl 105, 109 . e.
- — = Porter, Stanley 95, 304, 385 Porter, Virgil V. 315
Prostmeier, Ferdinand R. 115
MATTHEW, JAMES, AND DIDACHE
Stempel, Hermann A. 140, 165 Stewart-Sykes, Alistair 7, 164, 317, Schlosser, Jacques 194-95, 218, 238, 245, 271, 331, 348 Schmeller, Thomas 359 Schnackenburg, Rudolf 273, 298 Schnelle, Ulrich 375-76 Schnider, Franz 389, 391 Schofield, Malcolm 267, 269 Schéllgen, Georg 17, 45-47, 55, 58 Schreckenberg, Heinz 93 Schroter, Jens 5, 66, 68, 233, 237, 251,
341, 354 Stowers, Stanly K. 87, 343-44 Strecker, Georg 126, 144, 223, 325 Streeter, Burnett H. 20
Strugnell, John 214 Stuiber, Alfred 393 Sullivan, Desmond 384 Syreeni, Kari 51, 323 Sysling, Harry 112 271, 276, 376 Schulz, Siegfried 226 Schiirer, Emil 96, 100 Schiirmann, Heinz 327 Schwartz, Joshua 91, 112, 374 Schwartz, Seth 3, 101, 103-9, 111, 113-14 Segal, Alan F, 28 Selwyn, Edward G. 355, 357 Senior, Donald 20, 30 Shahar, Yuval 108 Shepherd jr., Massey H. 316, 341 Sim, David C. 2, 13, 15, 19-21, 25, Taine, Hippolyte 33 Tamez, Elsa 203, 209-10, 212, 227 Taylor, Joan E. 124
Taylor, Mark E. 190, 331 Theissen, Gerd 37, 139-40, 157, 167 Thiselton, Anthony C. 73
Thornton, Stephen 105 Thyen, Hartwig 318 Tigchelaar, Eibert J.C. 215
Tilborg, Sjef van 20 Tisera, Guido 29 Tomson, Peter J. 3-4, 51, 55, 57-58, 28-31, 67, 78, 85, 88-89, 142, 188, 328, 384, 387, 393 Simon, Marcel 125-26 Skarsaune, Oskar 123-24, 128 60, 81-82, 91-92, 104, 107-9, 116-20, 125, 361, 363, 373 Tromp, Johannes 55, 61 Tuckett, Christopher M. 77-78, 283, Slee, Michelle 20, 25, 30, 45, 69, 142,
Slingerland, H. Dixon 20 Smallwood, E. Mary 116 Smith, Morton 102-3 Snodgrass, Klyne 387 Séding, Thomas 274, 277
Tuilier, André 47-48, 155 Turner, Victor 230 Un-Sok Ro, Johannes 202 Urbach, Ephraim E. 328
Spitta, Friedrich A. W. 318
Sproston North, Wendy E. 15
Stanislawski, Michael 93 Stanton, Graham 19, 27-28, 264, 323, Vahrenhorst, Martin 8, 361, 363, 365, 367-70, 375-76 Verheyden, Joseph 4, 119, 123, 125,
233, 252 Verseput, Donald J. 180
Vielhauer, Philipp 46 Viviano, Benedict T. 20, 195 Vogt, Hermann J. 17
Starr, James 342, 344-45 Stegemann, Ekkehard W. 36
Stegemann, Wolfgang 36 Stemberger, Giinter 274
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS
Vouga, Fran¢gois 389-90 Vyhmeister, Nancy J. 231
Windisch, Hans 227 Wischmeyer, Oda 2, 33, 36, 41 Wright, Benjamin G. 214, 217, 290 Wright, R. B. 291
Wachob, Wesley H. 316, 332 Wall, Robert W. 292
Wansbrough, Henry 179, 285 Weber, Max 139-41, 157, 167, 209-10 Wengst, Klaus 45-46, 49, 51, 58, 61, Yarnold, Edward 275 Zahn, Theodor 109 Zangenberg, Jiirgen 1, 3, 43, 60, 66-67,
64, 67, 271, 284, 286 Weren, Wim J. C. 4-5, 26, 28, 65, 68,
Zerbe, Gordon M. 273
Zetterholm, Magnus 3, 45, 69, 73, 83, 177, 179, 184, 275, 376 Wettstein, Johan J. 328
Wick, Peter 369 Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von 85-86, 89, 118 Zissu, Boas 108 Zmijewski, Josef 190, 196 Zuckermandel, Moses S. 320
Wimsatt, William K. 73
Printed in the United States
206346B V00001 B/64-183/P
BS2575.52 .M39 2008
Sandt, Hubertus Waltherus Maria v Matthew, James, and Didache : three related documents in thei 39967000585278 DEMCO
Shatins many traditions and characteristics, the Gospel of Matthew, the letter of James, and the Didache invite comparative study. In this volume, internationally renowned scholars consider the three writings and the complex interrelationship between first-century Judaism and nascent
Christianity. These texts likely reflect different aspects and emphases of a network of connected communities sharing basic theological assumptions and expressions. Of particular importance for the reconstruction of the religious and social milieu of these communities are issues such as the role of Jewish law, the development of community structures, the reception of the Jesus tradition, and conflict management. In addition to the Pauline and Johannine "schools," Matthew, James, and the Didache may represent a third religious milieu within earliest Christianity that is especially characterized through its distinct connections to a particular ethical stream of contemporary Jewish tradition. The contributors are Jonathan Draper;
Patrick J. Hartin; John S. Kloppenborg; Matthias Konradt; J. Andrew Overman; Boris Repschinski, S.J.; Huub van de Sandt; Jens Schréter; David C.
Sim; Alistair Stewart-Sykes; Peter Tomson; Martin Vahrenhorst; Joseph Verheyden; Wim J. C. Weren; Oda Wischmeyer; Jiirgen K. Zangenberg; and Magnus Zetterholm.
Huub van de Sandt is Lecturer in New Testament Studies at Tilburg University. He is the editor of Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? and co-author of The Didache: Its Jewish
Sources and Its Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (both from Van Gorcum and Fortress).
Jiirgen K. Zangenberg is Professor of New Testament Exegesis and Early Christian Literature at Leiden University. He is the co-editor of Christians as a Religious Minority in a Multicultural City: Modes Of Interaction and Identity
Formation in Early Imperial Rome (Continuum) and Religion, Ethnicity, and Identity in Ancient Galilee: A Region in Transition (Mohr Siebeck).
IS 78-1-58983BN 4
| | 81589"833586
SB oO:
ae —== Society of Biblical Literature = OT