Matthew Black

The Pauline Doctrine of the Second Adam

In his recent important book, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism , Professor W. D. Davies, discussing St. Pauls doctrine of the Second Adam, writes: ‘Probably … this conception played a far more important part in his thought than the scanty references to the Second Adam in I Corinthians and Romans would lead us to suppose.’2 A similar importance has been attached to the idea by Dr A. J. Rawlinson in his New Testament Doctrine of the Christ ; it has provided Paul with some of his most characteristic Christology. It has also been claimed more than once that the Second Adam is St. Pauls substitute for the Gospel Son of Man, while both have been traced to a widely spread myth of the Urmensch , or primeval Man, the origins of which are obscure, but which was revived in the Gnostic Anthropos.

The Theological Appropriation of the Old Testament by the New Testament

To speak, in general terms, of trends in modern biblical study is often to over-simplify; and certainly to claim that there has been, in recent years, a trend away from the traditional classicist or ‘hellenist’ approach to New Testament problems towards a more Hebraic or semitic-centred approach would be to be guilty of the same exaggeration as E. C. Hoskyns in 1930: ‘(There are) grounds for supposing no further progress in the understanding of … Christianity to be possible unless the ark of New Testament exegesis be recovered from its wanderings in the land of the Philistines (sic) and be led back not merely to Jerusalem, for that might mean contemporary Judaism, but to its home in the midst of the classical Old Testament Scriptures — to the Law and the Prophets.’ There is, nevertheless, some truth in A. M. Hunters later statement: ‘After ransacking all sorts of sources, Jewish and Greek (and, we may add, starting all sorts of “hares”, some of which have not run very well), (scholars) are discovering the truth of Augustines dictum, “The New Testament lies hidden in the Old, and the Old is made plain in the New”’ ( Novum Testamentum in vetere latet, vetus in novo patet ).

The Use of Rhetorical Terminology in Papias On Mark and Matthew

recent studies and found its way into the latest commentaries on Mark and Matthew2-yet another possible aspect and interpretation to be pondered of these interminably debated verses of Eusebius. Not surprisingly, these latest observations on Papias’ language and style are not new: it was a classical scholar, F.H. Colson,3 who appears to have been the first to relate the terminology in Pap&dquo;’j‘~&dquo; to that of the rhetorical schools in Papias’ period, as well as to suggest

A History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135)

Introduction 1. Scope and Purpose of the Work 2. Auxiliary Sciences 3. The Sources- The First Period 4. Religious Crisis and Revolution 175-164 B.C. 5. Judas Maccabaeus 164-161 B.C. 6. Jonathan 161-143(2) B.C 7. Simon 143(2)-135(4) B.C. 8. John Hyrcanus I 135(4)-104 b.c. 9. Aristobulus I 104-103 B.C. 10. Alexander Jannaeus 103-76 B.C. 11. Alexandra 76-67 B.C. 12. Aristobulus II 67-63 B.C. The Second Period 13. Hyrcanus II 63-40 B.C. the rise of Antipater and his Sons Phasael and Herod 14. Antigonus 40-37 B.C. 15. Herod the Great37-4 B.C. 16. Disturbances after Herods Death 4 B.C. 17. From the Death of Herod the Great to Agrippa I 4 B.C.-A.D. 41. 18. Agrippa I A.D. 37, 40, 41-44. 19. The Roman Procurators A.D 44-66 20. The Great War with Rome A.D. 66-74 21. From the Destruction of Jerusalmen to the Downfall of Bar Kokhba/Appendices

A Bibliography On 1 Enoch in the Eighties

Eighties-taking full account of the Aramaic, the Greek and other versional fragments-is that of Siegbert Uhlig. It consists of a detailed Introduction followed by a German translation (with verse by verse footnotes) of a critical ’conflated text’ (the latter in the tradition of the 1901 Flemming and the 1906 Charles). The Introduction deals with the figure of the Patriarch ; the writings of the ’Enoch circle’; the integrity of the five-fold Apocalypse (originally a collection of apocalyptic tractates); the sources of the Aramaic, Greek and other fragments ; the history of the text; the circles responsible for the transmission of the tradition; and the date of the five main

Jesus and the Son of Man

titles the presence or absence of the little word ’and’ enables me to state the problem with which this paper deals. For G.S. Duncan, Jesus was the Son of Man: he so referred to himself: &dquo;Son of Man&dquo; was, in fact, his own chosen messianic self-designation. In this postBultmann era, however, we are told that it was the early church which applied this title to Jesus: He himself not only was not the Son of Man, and never laid claim to that title, but was, in fact, no more than a prophet of the coming heavenly Son of Man-Messiah of current Jewish

Uncomfortable Words: III. The Violent Word

other synoptists do, Professor Meye nevertheless finds that against the background of Jesus as Son of God, Mark presents Jesus as the creative Teacher who called the Twelve to be about Him and to be taught both by His words and His deeds. The Twelve are the locus of revelation and from them, taught finally by the crucifixion and resurrection, the Gospel goes forth into the world. The discussion is detailed and well documented and it makes a contribution to the study of this gospel which other scholars should consider. The second book is The Paradox of Jeszis in the Gospels (Westminster Press,

Second Thoughts: IX. The Semitic Element in the New Testament

6.50), where Professor Charles W. F. Smith discusses a constant tension between the Jesus who lived and died and the Lord who is exalted and worshipped. This is expressed in a series of paradoxes such as the universal Saviour who was a provincial preacher. Though the writers are believers in the first image they do not in the documents obliterate the second. This is a more readable book than the first, but it shows equal knowledge of recent discussion. To some extent the books are complementary, and while devoid of directly preachable material, both offer numerous insights which a preacher might turn to account.

Important and Influential Foreign Books: Ernst Percy's Message and Mission of Jesus' (Die Botschaft Jesu)

ment being a language by itself, ... its main feature was that it was the ordinary vernacular Greek of the period, not the language of contemporary literature ... but the language of everyday life, as it was spoken and written by the ordinary men and women of the day, or, as it is often described, the Kocvrj or Common Greek, of the great Graeco-Roman world.’ 1 The question is not just an academic one, since Deissmann’s theory, in spite of the qualified acceptance given to it

The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135)

on the R~essage and Mission of Jesus (Die Botschaft jesu: eine ti,aditionskritische und exegetische Untersuchung [Lund, 19531). The problem which the author sets out to examine has two main aspects : ( i ) Was the message of Jesus (like that of His predecessor the Baptist) simply a challenging summons to repentance and preparation for the oncoming eschatological Kingdom of God, or did it itself constitute a ’ saving Word ’ (Heilsbotsclaaft), in the sense that Jesus thereby mediated to those who responded in repentant obedience participation in the Kingdom ? This leads to two related questions, What is the relation of the commandments of