Collection of texts published previously.

This study fills a gap in previous research concerning the portrayal of Peter in Matthew, especially the research of narrative-critical studies. Although narrative-critical studies generally recognize that Matthew has portrayed Peter and the disciples as recipients of revelation at points, they almost entirely neglect the apocalypses or apocalyptic literature more broadly as a potentially helpful background for this motif, nor does the motif itself figure significantly into their conclusions. Therefore, Part 1 of this study examines fourteen different Jewish and Christian apocalypses in order to determine generic aspects of how the apocalypses portray their seers, and to identify specific textual features that support these generic aspects of a seer's portrayal. These specific textual features then provide the guiding coordinates for Part 2, which assesses the influence of the generic portrayal of apocalyptic seers on the portrayal of Peter and the disciples in Matthew's Gospel and main source, Mark's Gospel. Like the apocalypses, both Evangelists deploy the features of exclusionary statements, narrative isolation, dissemination details, and emphasis of cognitive humanity and emotional-physical humanity to portray Peter and the disciples as the exclusive recipients of revealed mysteries, and as humans who encounter the mysteries of the divine realm. This leads to the conclusion that both Evangelists envisaged Peter and the disciples as apocalyptic seers in some sense. However, Matthew's redaction of Markan source material, incorporation of Q source material, and his own special material yield a more fully developed, or more explicit, portrayal of Peter and the disciples as apocalyptic seers than his Markan predecessor. The study concludes by focusing directly on Peter's significance for Matthew and his earliest audience. The research suggests that Peter's significance was, in part, as principal apocalyptic seer, which requires revision to the predominant scholarly conclusions about Peter in Matthew.

As environmental destruction begins to seriously affect humans, it has become increasingly relevant to reflect on the essential elements of the Jewish and Christian theologies of creation. The essays in this volume explore key aspects of creation theology, which poses the question of the origin of the world and of man. Creation theology is rooted in the concept of man who owes his existence to God and who is placed in a cosmos which God created as “good”. At the same time, the essays show that even back in antiquity, the creation discussion held high potential for ideological criticism.

Salvation is often thought to be an all-or-nothing matter: you are either saved or damned. In the ancient world some figures, including Paul the Apostle, John of Patmos, Hermas, the Sethians, and the Valentinians, did not think this way, however. For them, there were multiple levels of salvation. Examining the reasons and implications for why these important thinkers believed that salvation comes in degrees, Heavenly Stories offers a fresh perspective on ancient thinking about responsibility, especially as it intersects with concerns such as genealogy and determinism. It shows why Jews and Christians of various kinds—some eventually declared orthodox, others heretical—correlated ethics and soteriology and argued over how this should be done. By constructing a difference between a lower and higher level of salvation, ancient authors devised soteriological hierarchies that could account for ethical imperfections and social differentiation between their communities and outsiders, as well as reinforce idealized portrayals of conduct among members of their own groups. Alexander Kocar asks how these thinkers identified and described these ethical and social differences among people; what commitments motivated them to make such distinctions; what were the social effects of different salvific categories and ethical standards; and what impact did hierarchically structured soteriologies have on notions of ethical responsibility? His findings have repercussions for the study of ancient ethics (especially free will and responsibility), our understanding of orthodoxy and heresy, and scholarly debates surrounding the origins of Christianity as a movement that allegedly transcends ethnic boundaries.

This book contains a collection of twenty of David E. Aune's essays on the subjects of apocalypticism, the Apocalypse of John, early Christian prophecy and early Christian magic. Several essays on the Apocalypse of John explore contextual relationships of the Apocalypse to apocalyptic literature from Qumran, Palestinian Jewish apocalyptic, Roman imperial court ceremonial, Greco-Roman revelatory magic and the social setting of the book. Other essays center on aspects of the content and interpretation of the Apocalypse itself by investigating such issues as discipleship, narrative Christology, genre, the problem of God and time, an intertextual reading of the book, the form and function of the proclamations to the seven churches (Rev 2-3), and interpretations of Rev 5 and 17. Essays on early Christian prophecy deal with charismatic exegesis in early Judaism and early Christianity, the relationship between Christian prophecy and the messianic status of Jesus, and the prophetic features found in the Odes of Solomon.

Is the establishment of the millennium binding of Satan cohesively linked with Jesus’s victorious battle in the Book of Revelation? This study is the first to answer this frequently debated question from a linguistic perspective.

What role did offers of physical healing (or the hope of receiving it) play in the missionary program of the apostle Paul? What did he do to treat the many illnesses and injuries that he endured while pursuing his mission? What did he advise his followers to do regarding their health problems? Such questions have been broadly neglected in studies of Paul and his churches, but Christopher D. Stanley shows how vital they truly become once we recognize how thoroughly “pagan” religion was implicated in all aspects of Greco-Roman health care. What did Paul approve, and what did he reject? Given Paul's silence on these subjects, Stanley relies on a cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach to develop informed judgments about what Paul might have thought, said, and done with regard to his own and his followers' health care. He begins by exploring the nature and extent of sickness in the Roman world and the four overlapping health care systems that were available to Paul and his followers: home remedies, “magical” treatments, religious healing, and medical care. He then examines how Judeans and Christians in the centuries before and after Paul viewed and engaged with these systems. Finally, he speculates on what kinds of treatments Paul might have approved or rejected and whether he might have used promises of healing to attract people to his movement. The result is a thorough and nuanced analysis of a vital dimension of Greco-Roman social life and Paul's place within it.

Despite centuries of scholarly and popular engagement, much confusion still hangs over Jesus’ Olivet Discourse. There is no consensus on the nature and meaning of the disciples’ question in Matt 24:3. How is the temple’s fate related to the parousia or second coming of Jesus? Is the Great Tribulation past, present, or future? Will Christians be raptured to heaven? Should you rather prefer to be “left behind”? Combining inductive and discourse grammar approaches as bases for literary structure and analysis, this study is a holistic and compelling fresh interpretation of Jesus’ eschatological discourse that provides answers to these questions. The author shows that extant interpretive frameworks fail to adequately account for the biblical data. Moreover, and unlike the available treatments, the study sheds light on the discourse’s structural and theological function within Matthew’s Gospel as a whole and how it coheres with New Testament teaching in general.

Scholarly interest in intertextuality remains as keen as ever. Armed with new questions, interpreters seek to understand better the function of older scripture in later scripture. The essays assembled in the present collection address these questions. These essays treat pre-Christian texts, as well as Christian texts, that make use of older sacred tradition. They analyze the respective uses of scripture in diverse Jewish and Christian traditions. Some of these studies are concerned with discreet bodies of writings, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, while others are concerned with versions of scriptures, such as the Hebrew or Old Greek, and text critical issues. Other studies are concerned with how scripture is interpreted as part of apocalyptic and eschatology. Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality includes essays that explore the use of Old Testament scripture in the Gospels and Acts. Other studies examine the apostle Paul's interpretation of scripture in his letters, while other studies look at non-Pauline writings and their utilization of scripture. Some of the studies in this collection show how older scripture clarifies important points of teaching or resolves social conflict. Law, conversion, anthropology, paradise, and Messianism are among the themes treated in these studies, themes rooted in important ways in older sacred tradition. The collection concludes with studies on two important Christian interpreters, Syriac-speaking Aphrahat in the east and Latin-speaking Augustine in the west. [Part of the LNTS sub series Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity (SSEJC), volume 14]

Should Christians be embarrassed by the book of Revelation? The Revelation of John has long confused and disturbed readers. The Apocalypse of John among Its Critics confronts the book's difficulties. Leading experts in Revelation wrestle honestly with a question raised by critics: Should John's Apocalypse be in the canon? (Alan S. Bandy) Was John intentionally confusing? (Ian Paul) Was John a bully? (Alexander E. Stewart) Did John delight in violence? (Dana M. Harris) Was John a chauvinist? (Külli Tõniste) Was John intolerant to others? (Michael Naylor) Was John antisemitic? (Rob Dalrymple) Did John make things up about the future? (Dave Mathewson) Did John advocate political subversion? (Mark Wilson) Did John misuse the Old Testament? (G.K. Beale) Engaging deeply with Revelation's difficulties helps the reader understand the book's message—and respond rightly. The book of Revelation does not need to be avoided or suppressed. It contains words of life.