Dictiona «Later Ne Testament & Its Developments Peter H. Davids INTERVARSITY PRESSJnteNoity Pros 20, ay 1400 Doses na, H.89519 OSA Wn Wee Wes wep. Prvnit: weapress cm Inte aay Ps 18 Manne So, aves LE YE, Egon (O97 by Inet ChitinnFotndip ESA | Aight reer. Ne rt of is tak ab etc cay ors wen cen formson fe Fey Ps, tet Pes the bk ping nds of Iter Obi Feauip/OSA,«vulontnosonent vtec on camps a ean of sales ees and scouts of ws United State of Arica, ade moar woven of Ue Pemaionel Fbestip of Forge Students Fa information abou dc wed gino stct,seite Mie Neetions xp, Plenty Caan Pela /UA, (6400 Scher Bi, PO. Bs TROS, Maven, WH 537077895, sate Yersity Pres Hla he bc uh ig ison of te Urinens and Coes Ostia Fes (ore the ner Vary Feloestipy, atest mrwcandEning Chrsin Uiens in etre ols tht the United Kingdom ad he Bao ef rah nel mraer mst of the ermal Bells of Bone Sens or infor aber val wt nations eae te UCOK 38.00 Montprt Stet, Lows LES 7OB, Al Srittse quotations, nls cei nied ne he ara lations. These iene NIV ae tole from We Hol be, New Toersstons Version) NIVOD Cpt ©1035, 1974, 19NS hy intreianad y Sachy Cl by pornicon of Zonderoun Pushing Hoses ped Cet Ratan by Hohe cn Slt La AM ight eon Thoin RSV fran te Reser Ss ‘ers a he Bike, epi 16 1952, 1971 by he Dahon of Con Paci ofthe Nia Cua of the Che of Cassin ho A, end nd Oy pera, ee ened NRSV fom ch New Revised Sarl Versio he Bie eight 9872 he Divisio of Chane Edwetion of the Nand Cone of the Sse of Crt in he USA, wal we by pena 1, Rasen sat Musa, . Pedsog, Rosie on pasngoph Sela /Aut Resour NY, Kale, nde Sion Ve Los sin 9408 ep xe mtx ano 11h 2904 Priel the United Sates of nica Library oF Congress Catslaginga-Publication Data rater of the ler No Tsuna a dept ons Ralph P Mavi, Pr ese, bom Actes tata ferences a inde S08 (68908 17794 al paged Fi Mile NAc Bnayeafedes, 2. Bide NT Hebres— gedaan, 3, ible NT Gata Epskes—Eneybpis 4 Mike NU. Recatun—Bncselpeion 5, Cha ory Prin end cy md, ca, 1L600—Aeyelpaias 1 Marin, Ralph # i Dot, Pte yeas 39351897 225 Ise) 36098 ae Britt Library Cataloguing in Publeaton Da veoh Roo 8 7 ti eal seiner th ri Lary. 10 0) Os OF OOF Mm m3 02 oF On 9 9% OFInterVarsity Press Executive Divector Robert Fryling Editorial Staff Leditorial Director Andrew T. Le Peau Managing Editor James Hoover Reference Book Editor Daniel G. Reid Buditorial Assistants Gloria Duncan-Beyilacqua Melinda Syens Proofreaders Drew Blankman David Zimmerman Production Staff Production Manager Nancy Fox Pruduction Coordinator Don Frye Design Kathy Lay Burrows Design Assistant Andrew Craft Typesetters Gail Munroe Audrey Smith Marjorie Sire Programming Consultant ‘Andy ShermerContents How to Use This Dictionary xi Abbreviations iii ‘Transliterations scot List of Contributors xxvii Dictionary Articles, Z Scripture Index 1243 Subject Index 1266 Articles Index 1288Preface In the previous wo companion volumes, dedicated to the parts of the New Testament called *Gospels” and “Pauline Epistle fade to introduce readers to those documents with which the readers would be familiar; Hence the respective prefaces acknowledged the foundatio and “the Apostle,” A different kind of introduction is called for in this third yetcomplementary refe ” an attempt was 0 al character of what the early church called “the Gospel” work, Here—in the remaining books of the New ‘Testament canon—the reader is more than likely to be on a terra incognita, Features such as the complex arguments of the letter to the Hebrews, the moralizing tendency of James the Just, the fierce denunciations sounded in the epistle of Jude as well as the more accessible First Peter and the Acts of the Apostles will come to mind as representing books which cry out for elucidation, And who has not felt the need for scholarly and sympathetic guidance while patiently if with puzzlement, reading the final book, called the Revelation? This Dictionary will, we hope, be among the first resources a student, teacher and communicator will turn to when seeking assistance. Itis to offer such help that the contributions to the present full-scale Dictionary of the Later New Testament and lis Developments were conceived, assembled, composed—and now are offered to the public. The than the nvo earlier dictionaries, will fill a perceived gap in the field of reference books i editors are bold to surmise that this volume, perhaps more (crs, Christian, on the New Testament, Itis designed to come to the aid of preache laypeopl the academy when called on to teach these often neglected books of the canon, Mention of the New Testament canon calls to mind a recent (1983, 1995) pronounce- ment of the doyen scholar C. K. Barret Writing on “Phe Centre of the New Testament and the Canon” (in his collected essays Jesus and the Wind [Edin burgh: T&T Clark, 1995 | 259-76), he states in support of his position that the norma normans of New ‘Testament theology, the means of testing theological propositions (or better, he would say, the church’s proclamation), is a nuanced version of the slogans sola fide, solus Christus, the “claim that in practice no harm but good results [follow] if we look at all the literary products of the apostolic and subapostolic ages” (his emphasis). ‘To respond to this remark would involve a discussion of the ongoing debace regarding the “center of the New Testament” and the limits and definition of canonical authority. It is sufficient here to note that the coverage in this Dictionary will, we trust, put the readers in a position to see the ways the formulation of the Christian message developed from the Synoptic Gospels and Paul to the remaining New Testament books and then up to about the hard-pressed stuclents of theology no less than the editors’ colleagues inmiddle of the second century, Commitment to a determinative canon (embracing the twenty-seven books in our New Testament) should make room for (1) a frank admission that books often thought to be peripheral to the alleged “center” are still held to be normative, for as Dr, Barrett remarks, “there cannot be degrees of eamontieity” and (2) an equally frank acknowledgment that Christian thinking did not cease with the last New postolic fathers. Testament book, and it developed in those writings usually called the The decision to take the lines of development up to A.D. 150 was a matter of conv ence, since a cut-off point was clearly needed if the volume was to be of manageable size, A certain editorial latitude, however, was granted to coniributors who felt it needful to clucte material from the later patristic period, One reason for this inclusion is to allow developments that come to fuller fruition in the luc second and subsequent early centuries to cast their light backward on the obscurities of the period A.D. 100-150, ‘To change the metaphor, germination and flowering of a Christian truth often requires a considerable length of time Lo appear. The editors and publisher struggled to find a suitable title for this volume that would do justice to its diverse subject matter and yet stand in continuity with the Dietionary of Jesus and the Cospels and the Dictionary of Pant and His Letters. No prejudicial judgment should be read into the parttitle, The Later New Testament, As will be clear, the ease for ing Jude or Jamesanterior to the Paufine letters still continues to be made, even if the tendeney is to place these Tetters in a subsequent decade, By gencral consensus, however, the bulk of the literature covered in this vohime was written chronologically after the Pauline chief letters and, in some cases, after the publication of the Synoptics. Again, the adjective “Tater” is one of convenience, justas the term Develaprments js in no way intended to blur the line of demarcation the church has accepted (since Athanasius) beqween canonical and noncanonical, even if the story of the canonization of the New Testament has the ragged edges admitted by Eusebius Once more the editors are quick to recognize their debts and pay tribute to all who have made this vohime possible. Secretarial help in the production processes and the ready cooperation of our team of contributors, drawn frorn around the world and across the boundaries of chureh affiliation, ethnicity and gender, are gratefully acknowledged, It remains to send out the third member of this ambitious series (which will eventually include a Dictionary of New Testament Background and four volumes on the Old Testament) erye the interests of readers. It is designed to in the hope that it may, with its partners, assist those who seck to understand the remaining books of the New Testament in their historical, literary and religious setting and to observe the flow of church life, thought n of geography and culture, from Paul and the and history across a diverse sp Synoptic Gospels to Justin in Rome. Ralph P. Martin Peter HH. Davids Abbrevi: Compre and ane Authors! ‘The auth article. 4 of their Bibliogr. A biblio, cited int in alphal work cite on speci categori Cross-re! The Dict the most will be fo 1. One readers ti Abba, 2. An: that title: entitled ( 3.Acr the reade to an arti to preven eitheran of relatedHow to Use This Dictionary Abbreviati Comprehensive tables ofabbreviations for general mattersas well as for scholarly, biblical and ancient literature may found on pages xiiisoxy. Authorship of Articles The authors of articles are indicated by their first initials and last name at the end ofeach article, A full list of contributors may be found on pages xxviixxx, in alphabetical order of their last name. The contribution of each author is listed alphabetically. Bibliographies A bibliography has been appended to each article. The bibliographies include works cited in the articles and other significant related works, Bibliographical entries are listed in alphabetical order by the author's last name, and where an author has more than one work cited, they are listed alphabetically by tile. In some types of articles (e.g., articles on specific NT literature and apostolic fathers) the bibliographies are divided into categories, Abbreviations used in the bibliographies appear in the tables of abbreviations, Cross-references The Dictionary has been extensively cross-referenced in order to aid readers in making ing throughout the volume, Five types of cross-referencing the most of material appe: will be found: 1, One-line entries appearing in alphabetical order throughout the Dietionary direct readers to articles where a topic is discussed: Abba, Se God; Son of God. 2. An asterisk afier a single word in the body of an article indicates that an article by that title appears in the Dictionary, For example, *Christ®” directs the reader to an article entitled Christ, 8. A cross-reference appearing within parentheses in Lhe body of an article also directs the reader to an article by that title, For example, (se Church Order) directs the reader toan article entitled Church Order, Government. Such cross-relcrences are used either to prevent the confusion an asterisk might introduce (i.e., Son of God could refer to either an article on “God” or “Son of God”) or to dircet the readers attention to an article of related interest.Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments 4, Crossrelerences have been appended to the end of articles, immediately preceding. the bibliography, to direct readers to articles significantly related to the subject: See also HYMNS; LITURGICAL ELEMENTS; WORSHIP, LITURGY, 5, Where appropriate, references are made to articles in the companion volumes, the Dictionary of fesus and the Gospelsancl the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. These references are found within the body of the text of articles and never in bibliographies. For example, a reference such as (see DJG, Gentiles) refers to the article on “Gentiles” in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, and a reference such as (see DPL, Righteousness of God §2.4) refers toa specilic section within the article on “Righteousness of God” found in the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. The purpose of these references is both to assist readers in exploring related topics in Jesus and Pan! as well as to provide contrasting or alternative points of view, Indexes Since most of the Dic intended to assist readers in finding relevant onary articles cover broad topics in some depth, the Subject Indexis formation on narrower topics that might, for instance, appear in a standard Bible dictionary, For example, while there is no article led “Nazoreans,” the subject index might direct the reader to pages where the Nazoreans are discussed in the articles on “Jewish Christianity,” “Ebionites” or elsewhere A Sovipture Indes is provided to assist readers in gaining quick access to the Scriptures referred to throughout the Dictionary. An Articles fndex found at the end of the Dictionary allows readers quickly to breadth of topics covered and sclect the ones most apt to serve their interests or needs, For those who wish to identify the articles written by specific contributors, they are listed with the name of the contributors in the list of contributors, en ‘Transliteration Hebrew and Greek words have been transliterated according to a system set out in the front maticr. Greek verbs appear in their lexical form (rather than infinitive) in order to assist those with litle or no knowledge of the language in using other reference works. sti General Ab gorse cent of, chaps) ‘Translations o sy Au AV Ai 1B AV Ki NASB Ne NEB NeAbbreviations General Abbreviations Sorss section oF paragraph mumber(s) ny. margin requently to indicate Loeb MS or MSS manuseript or manuscripts CChassical Library numbering syste MT Masoretie Text (saudlard Hebrew text for Josephs) ff the Old Testament) x Coulee Sitaiteus nal no date va exe, (Greek) nsx siew series Bee. second edition Nr New Testament ‘ed, third edition, os. ‘ld series 4 Godlex Alewandrinns or (Old Testament B Goulex Vaticanus Pep. paige oF pages G Codex tphracmi Syri poe sxith due respect to, bus differing from ‘ ives, about (with cates); column par parallel pusige iv another other cent conmry Gospels) compare passim thoughout elap(s).——chapteris) pl plus D Govdex Bezae prese prescrip ss. Dead Sea Scrolls Q ‘Quelle ("sayings” source lor Synoptic em sxempl gratia, for example Gospels) et, edition; editor(s) edited by repr reprint up. ‘especially ney revised (edttion) ri English translation Syriac EW English versions of the Bible Syonmachus's Greek wanslaion of the exp. coxpanced (edition) Old Testarnenie Frag agen (of doemment) Te Taryn Gk Greek Theod. Thevdotion’s Greek twanslation of the Heb Hebrew (Old Testament ido, thavis orn, verve oF verses an, kilometer vl ‘wero eto (variant reading”) Lat Latin, vol voluine 1Xx, Septuagine (Greek translation ofthe x times (2x = en times, ete.) (Old Testament) ‘Translations of the Bible sv American Standadl Version (1901) Niv New International Version Authorized Version (Use KJV) NRSV New Revised Standard Version: Jerusalem Bible REB Revised English Bible AV ‘King James Version (same as AV) RSV Revisod Standard Version NASB New American Standard Bible RV Revised. Version (1881-85) NEB New Hngtish bibleDictionary of the Later New Testament and Ity Developments Books of the Bible Apostol (Testament Barn, Gen Ps ahr 1m. Ex Prov Hab 2Gem. Lev Reeles ep Dit Num ay Diogn, Dent Zech Hom, Mes Josh Jer Mat Hom. Sin Judy, Lan tie Horm Vis Ruth Eek New Team Phiten ign. 12Sam Dan Me Heb 12 Rings Hos Mk Jas vechn Joel tk 1-2 Par Other k ta Amos Jn — Obad Acts Jude Acts Jon Rom Rey Ades Job Mic 12Cor Aust asl ae Ambrose ‘The Apocrypha and Septuagint ah ey 1224 Keds 24 Kingeloms 1-294 Mace 34 Maceaiees Add Esth Additions t Lsther De Avar ser of Brasil Pe Bar Baruch Pe Man Prayer of Manasseh Ving et Bel and the Dragon St Siraeh (oF Kecesitieus) Ap jos 13 Eade 1.2 Beds Sus Swianna Aunanat ater Bara Te bt Den. Jat Jui Wis AWisom of Soloman Apocalyps Epler piste of fereniah Ape Apo ‘Anitides The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha ‘Apel Atanas an aed ie Lifecf Ada and Bie Mart, Marbrtom of iol ar Ahig. Ahiqar Pst, So Psalms of Solomon Ep Fe ‘por Abe ‘Apovatypue of Alam Poend Pho, Pando Phocyites Fig 2:3 Apoe, Bar Shri, Greek Apaipse of amich Si Or Siytitne Oates Athenagor ‘Apo Mes Apocalypse of Movs 1 12Pan “Thsdamens ofthe Tater Pach Lag ‘Ap: Eh Apucaipe of Eijh wd, ‘Tstamens of Reem sp Ane. 2th Apocalypse of Zpherich 1 Si etanen of Seen Augustine Apr, Sr. ‘Apocalypse of Seach 1 Lei Testament of Levi Gut As, Mos. Asunpion of Moves for 1 fu Tetenen of fob Conf “Testarnent of Moses) Thy Fastiement of Issachar De Gn Ase. Ascension of leigh Tub, stant of Zenon oats Ani Biblia Antiguitr ot Dan “stamens of Dan %, PeewloPillo T Naph,——‘Tetamen of Napa Hae 12.3 nec Ethiopie, Swonie, Hebrew 1 Gat ‘eanen of Cant Hon. Enuth 1 Ashe ‘Thtunen of Asher xa Bp Avi piso of risies T jon ‘htanen of Jus ue ips and At Juphand Avena 1 desi Petunen of Benj cc Ju les Pah stenen of Abraham “Liv, Prop ‘Lives ofthe Prophets (Fol L fob ‘estament of fob Chnysoston lowed by prophet's name) Mos, “Testament of Moses Hom. tom Repu xivApostolic fathers Abbreviations or Clon, 2G, Did, Dingn Ham, Man. Han, Sin. Har. Vs Ig in Other Early Chri pte of Barwalas Lhe Diseohe Bpiute to Dingnars Sieped of Heras, Memalou) Sip of Ferma, Sindlitare(s) Shp of Herma, Vision(s) Ignanins Leder to the Bpesiams ian Literature Acts of polos Acts of Plot Avis of Past an Phe ‘Aus of Thomas D Expositia Feangyit Srendrn raha foucam In Prabyos De Virgins Apoyo yf frmes Demonstrations Apoeatipie of Peut AMucalypue of Pater Apologia hats Aes Apo ‘Aas Pi Aets Pant &? Ths Aets Thom, Ambrose Mr Fig Bu, Le Pe Ving Ap jes Aplialeat (ar Aphraates) Der. Apocalypscs Apr. Past Ape, Peter Ariss Ape Alanasius Fig, ‘Athenagoras Lap Conf. De Cons Doe hist, tp fo Ho: Quart Evan. Bo o Anysostom Hom. Cn, Ho, M. Rigno Abdversus Aviano. Fest Epistes poli pro Bag Sua Lngitia pro Cstants Suiplcasi pre Christians De Civitate De Conpesiones Dae Consens Boangelisiorin De Duetyine Christiana Basta Die Hacvsibus Honitia Ona Revlin Gnostic Codes Nag Hamma, Grostic Cosives tiowes Bangtiorre Hoes on Genesis Howls on Medticw De Remo yn, Magn Ign. PAUL gn. Pat yo. Rone Tn, San gu, Troll Mart Ped Po), Pid Clement of Alex El, Proph. Excerpta Prag. Adu. Prag. Bp jude Pant Pra Quis Di Sinn Thee Cyprian Dom Os Hy Taps Gyr of Jerse Myst. Cat Weights bis Bart, Theot Hist bec Der, Be fas Prey Bx Goxpels Gas, Ba Gas, Bb Gos. By Gas, Heh, Gos. Mary Gas, Naas Gon Paik Gor, Pa Gon Thos Hitwy af Poitiers Din Hippotytus Ajns Trad, Den, (hi Hoon gmatins oer to ths Mogesins Ignatius Later othe Peatpiaes Iagmatins Letter to Polearp Igmatius Latter to de Rone Jgwatins Letter ihe Sagres Igwatius Leer Ue Tralbions Marino of Pobcaip Polyencp Latuert0 the Philippians Exlgae Propheiean Bxverpta es Vaeodoto Froginonts on Aduinbrationer ragnonte Eps of ue Pardagogus Prosnpithes Quis Dies Sader Siromateis Leiter to Theatre DeDerivica nations pita Do Lepsis Mysingegical Cauchoses pinta Nposcoloren Haereses Wich anid Measures De Recsiasica Theolegia Historia Heletastica aoonntratio Boungsticn Conmentary on the Psabns Pragati Faeangeliow sped of Barthokonra Gasp of the Bbionites Gospel of the Cospl of te Helos Gospel of Mary Gospel ofthe Neasseras Gasp of Philip Gasp of Pour Gosped of Thome De trinitae Apostolic Triton Dentmstvaio de Chis Antivita De HansibusDictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments Rept Reputation of AU Heresies, ox Pap. rag Fragma of Paphas Geer Paidwoplaimena Perot Papyras Beolinensis Debi Tremens re Paipoogie Grace, ed J.P. Dele Haw Adds Hace Migne eof Jerome Prat. fas, Pootevangetinan of fees Deon Come Gal Commentary on Galatians Peewlo-Clementines Deke Gomme, Mau, Gonmmntary om Matthew Hom. Homies Phit Camo, Mic Covimontary on Beal rcogn Recognitions Bab, bp. Ppiscutas Rofinus Tass Vin De Vins Mustvilns Hist ed Historia Kedbsiastice Cote fuse Pro in Ma Prologue to Matthew “Tatiam Comp. Herm. Prauf. in Qual. Bas Profs o te Four Gonpels Ox Groce, Ora el Cravens Demosthen Justin Martye Tertullian ‘Ag Co Apu. I Apology HE Ad Jd Ardversus Judes aon. Coben: Grae, Cohortai ad Craccos Ad Naw ‘Ad Nationes Dig, jus, Dial, Pryph. Dialogue wth Typo the fen Aa is Ad Usoren Dio Cassius On Gr Oratie ad Craveos pod Afelogeticus Epi Hesurre On the Resnresion De Anina De Anima Hs, acantins De Carn, De Care nist Dio Chrysos Dies Fast Dive Instetiones De Prac, De Praseiptione Maantionan De Hom Mart, justin ‘The Macrae of Justin ved De Bap De Boptismo Dive Companions DeCe ‘De Cenona On Mun. Pry Muratorian Bragaaent De Cutt Pom, ‘De Cute Beminarane Diodorus Sie Ordes So des of Solomon De fs De tolaatriea Bil, His Origen re. ffan, Da Jenin Ades Pschicos Comin. fo, Commentary on john De Orot De Onatione Comm. Mt. Conamentory on Matthew De Pud, DePudictia Gaon, Gs. Conmra Gels De Res De Resursctine Camis Dion. Hal, De Princ. De Prinspis De Spe, De Stectocniis Epictetus short, Mest Exhuatatio ad Mar yviuee Mest: Advensus Marsienenn Disa Hon. Monies on Excel Pu. De Padiita Diss Hon, fos Homilies on osewa Pres: Adore Praees Pach. Hoa. Tae Homi on bul Sump Soxpiace Pass Pap.Fe Passion of Paputua and Fbctas Theophilus of Antioch Lipp. Pai ech, Pa Ardon Auto, Ad Acdoycure Galen Seles Pr Seca in Pacinos De Pci Gr Anth, Classical and Hellenistic Writers and Sources Hesiod op. eli Araius Theeg, De Nat, Anin De Natura Anivalin Pham. Phenomena Homer Aeschylus Asiatophanes: he Pas Pasar Ths ‘Thesmephorisousat is, Sept Tre Septem contra Tiebas Actua Acharaenses Horace Suppl Supplces Avistatle Sat Ammonis Cae De Caclo Jamblichus “Adfin, Vora Diff. De Aafinium Voeabudorwn Eth, Nie Bifser Nieomachea De My Difjeventia Pol Paiitiea drser Cos Anacharsis Prob, Prabienase Bp. Epistle to Tereus Astemidoras Anipater Ones Oneivoeritiam Tsocrites Anh Pal, Anthologies Pedatina Aulus Gels De Appian Neates Atco Panath Mith, We Mitndatic Wars Paneg. Gi We Cont Wars Ei Epigrammata Jovephus Apuleius Chariton Ant Met Mevimuopleoses Chace Cerone and Caltriow AW. aulCicero De iv, Doles. De Off De Ona. Pri Ral, Pe Tuse rads fas, np, Herm. Demosthenes Ag. Lacnt Dig. Juss. Dio Cassius Ep Hist Dio Chrysostom De Homo Dis, or Diodorus Sicults Bib, Fs Diogenes Lacrcus Vin it Dion. Hal Epiceerms Die, Diss neds Euripides Hipp: Galen De Pacts Gi, Anth Hesiod Op. Theog. Homer a Oss, Horace Sat Tamblichus De Myst ee Cor Iboeraues Den Peoth, Pang Josephus nt, iW De Divinatons De Lagitns De opis De Orutre De Reta Onationes Pilippicne Rabiria Perduellin’s Tusoutarae Disputationes Ck of ustinian Gonpus Heraticu Aguinst Conon ‘Againet Lacie Digescof Justinian Ronman History Ronn Fistor De Homo at Soerate Disernsses Onationes iiliotheen Taorica Vite litera Dionysius of Hi Discourses Dissertationes Mnctiriten Hippoiyeus De Placitis Hippocratis et Platonis rok Arathotogy pra ot tise Theegonsa ia Odgsvy Suties De Myutoés The Inscriptions of Co, ed W.R. Paton and E. L, Hicks caso) Dereanicus Panathenaicns Paneggrivas Antiquities ofthe fas Ievish Wars Lie Ag Ap. Justinian Digas Juvenat Sut Livy Bit Hist, Lucian of Samosata Me Fler Porn Prato. Ti. Mareus Aurelins Med: Martial Ebi Muson, Rot Nicolaus of Damascus Vit, Cres Orosius Peg. On Ping. vie P Cae, Zen, Pausunins Desc Petronius Sal POM Philo. Ae ‘et Mind. Agr Cher Conf. Ling Gongs Deced Dat Pot ns. Dew fo Fo Place Pag. Og. dow Leg. AM, Leg, Ce ig Abn It, Nom. Abbreviations Lig of Ravin: Jouephs Agent Apion Digest of Femur Law Sative Epitome History of Rome Alexanier the False Prophet Hlormatioss ‘De Mont: Perini Pilpseuies Toxanis Meditations Epigrans Muvonius Rufus Vive Caesars Aadversus Paganas Oyphic Pragments Movamorponss ‘Yenon Papyri, ed C.C Hidgar, Zeon Payri vols, 1A (Le Caire, 1925-91; Caton logue wénérale ces antiquités égyptiennes du Musée da Gaite) esoiption of Crevce Satyricon Papyr-Crascae Moygivae De Athens De Astenitate Mund De Agrivuttara De Cherubin De Conjusione Lénguarnm De Congest Enditienis Grats Desecatogs (Quod Deters Potion Iasi Sele Qua Dens Sit reais Dr Elect Tu Macau De De Cigantibes Defoe Legum Afegeriee Legato ad Cain De Migratione Abrateam De Mudcasone Nominaam Fuge ot PncentioneDictionary of the Later New Testament and Tis Developments ‘On. Prot. Lid, Quel Onis Probus Liter Sit vi Vitae Dead Sea: Op. Sw. De Opie Mund Ales De Mlexondro — Prem DePuoretione Ant De Antonio on Post: € De Pasteritate Cin Guesar Ds Casa P Buen, Porn De PreaniisetPreais Nana Denes e Pow De Provdentia Pomp, Dr Pompeo 10.50, Quest in Bs Ouaestiones in Exodet Potybins AQere Quact in Go, Quacstiones im Gonesin His. ivi Ze Dts Hen Quis oro Divinamon Hers Sit. Procios 1Qapon Save Do Sacrfis Metis Cai tu Tem. dn Platonis Toa Commer 1QH Sm. DeSonnis tarius Qi Spee age DesSpcilibns Legis Ouinstian IQ vin De Vitus Tat, Oat Instvtio Orato 1M it Cant De Vita Contemplation Seneca 1Opitab Vit. Mos, De Vita Mosis Hon De Bouts 10Psa? Phiostrats ie Vit De Brvitate Vitor 108 Vie Ade Viva Apotonis. fe Cen. De Clemmntia Pind fp. Lait pats co Lins 1984 Ile Jstionia Ff. Mor Fpsnilae Morates 1080 Pato hocles 3) Ae Aleit Fle Electra 4Q139 Apat Ategia Oak, Bye Gaius Fyrannes 4Q169 Ch Gruylus Siobaeus 40171 Cone, Geagias Pat, Boge 40156 Ly, Seges Surabo, 4Q186 Phe Phaerrus Ge Geography 4Q2i8, Praag. Protagoras Suetonius 4Q400-407 Pes os Pati Claudins from ‘The Teeter Goes 4Q504 siph Sophisns Domitian from ‘The Peelve Caesars 4051814 Syop. Sppesion Galba from The Teelve Caesars 4QDibiam* Tim Tioraews Julies from The Teelve Caesars 408 nGions (ihe elder) ‘Neo fom The Fale Gaeons 40En*# Naw. His. Natialis Historia Titerins from The Tule Caesars 4QEnasu*® Paregy Prngpricns Titus fvom Tr Tuetoe Crasors Miny (die younger) Vespasion fiom The Tslve Carrs 4 Flor Eh pistes cits 4QMess Puareh fam Annales bh Excess Di 4Qur Moe Moratia August 4QpNah Aetna Die Adelaone et Amira His. Hostarie 4QPhy1 (oto Adoerss Coto Theon 4QPrNab Con, Pre. Caniugolin Pravepta Prag Progymaasnaia 4QPxDana® One Quavstions Ceavivaes Thueydides 4QPssjosh Dif. Ora Lie Befeeae Oracudorare Hist History ofthe Ptoposnesion Wer 4Q8hirshabh Pec, Len De kacie in Orbe Luna Valerius Maximus Fark Ror De Fortuna Remanoram Feet, ac Dic. Fectorwme ce Dieters Moment restr Gen. Soe De Geno Socats ‘ition Lita 4Qtgfoh seit De tse et Osiride Veyetios Renauns AQigLev Lib, Hae. De Lier Fitucants pit, Rei Milt. ‘Epitome Rei Mitaris 5015 aul. vir, Moutierum Visnues Virgil 11QH Nom Posse Sars Now Poise Suavter Viv Secor Geog, Geonics LOMeten den pierune Xenophon NQpateotey Pravs Cer Reipnds Praca Geren Beitice Hist, GcHistovia Graeea igh Pom Quasstiones Romance ‘Mem. Memeraitia Seats 11GTemple NQujob Six Mura. Vind sani De Sora Nees VirlictaAbbreviations Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Texts coy P Q 19,3, AQ 1QxpGen Lon LO lQu LQMyst 1QpEab 1QPe" 198 1984 198» 3QL8 12139 1Q169 4Q171 4Q175 4Q186 4245 400407 40504 sQ51b14 Henk Aggie 4Q§or 4QMess ar 4QNMT. 4QpNabt 40Phy1 4QUNad 4QesDana? AQhssfosh 4Qshirshabh 4QTestim 4Qighob 4QgLev 5018 11QH 11QMeleh 11Qpaleo.av gee LiQremple LQajob Cain Genteah text of the) Durmavens (Document /fe) Pesher (commentary) Quinn Numbered caves of Qumran, yiek material; followed by abbrevia ng written (ion ov pumber of document Goes Abocryplon irom Qumran Cave L (11920) Hiskiyét ov Thansgiosng Hyman trons Quuneats Cave 1 of isaiah from Qumran Cave 1 _Mithavnatror Wor Sez ron ¢ Mysteries (1Q23) Pesher on Hodakus from Quin y copy of Palas (LOL) Seok hayrabiad oc Ruteof he Community Manat of Diseibline rom Qumran Cave 1 “Appenciix A, Masianie Rule, to 1QS trom Qumnzan Cave 1 (1Q28) “Appencix B, Rul of the Blsciags, to LQS fre Qumran Cave T 1Q28) Copper Sort ivom Quinran Cave 3 relinances or commentaries on biblical kes from Quran Cave 4 Pesher o Nahum feo Quunran Cave 4 Pesher on Psalms from Quinran Cave 4 anlacndrm ox Cencelations From Quanran Cave 4 (sce 4QMess a) (sce 4QPsDanA') {ece AQShirShabb} ands of the Lanaieies vorn Qumran Cave 4 Ordinasiees es on biblical law from Quumnran Cave Words ofthe Lumnorie (A504) 1 Enoriefragnyents from Book of Giants from Qumran Cave 4 (4! 1 Bnoeiefeaganents from Quinran Cave 4 (AQ201-212) 1 Boel frag (4Q206-211) Hirilegium ox Eschedoogical Midrasim irom Quenran Cave 4 (AQ174) Aramaic *Measianie" tex {rom Qumran Cave 4 (1Q524) Migsat Maiaseh oral from. Quunvany Cave 4 (4Q804.309) Jhum Pesher fiom Qumran Cave 4 (4Q169) Phaylacteries from Quoaran Cave 4 (4Q12%-148) Prayer of Nabonidustrom Qumran Cave 4 (40242) Peuce-Danielic Writings fron Quanean Cave 4 AQE46) Prats of esta frown Qunaran Cave 4 AQ879) Sig of Sabbath Sacrifice or Argel Liturgy from Qumran Cave 4 4QH00-407) sabnenia text from Qumran Cave 4 (4Q0 Targum of jo from Qumran Cave 4 (4QI52) Tags of Lait torn Quonran Cave 4 (AQ136) [Nev forusalm ron Quinran Cave 5 (QUS) Hiyrms (QUE) Melehieddk Irom Qumvvan Cave 1 (QI Copy of Levitiens In paleo-Hebrew script from Quinran Cave HE (QD, Paatms SeoftTrom Quanran Cave HQ) Temple Srl fon Quanran Cave 11 (11019) Fangur of Jeb rom Quinran Cave 11 (11Q10) Firs. or second co ann Cave 1 Fragment nis from Astronomical Book from Qarnran Cave 4‘Targumic Material Py Te Fragmentary Targum Sam. Ty Samaritan Targuin Ty. Cant Teer of Cantices (Song of Solomon) ‘Ty Both 1, 17 Hirst ov Socondl Targa of Esther Ty, Isa Fargum of Isaiah Ty. Ket. Targum of the Writings Tg, Neb Targum of the Prophets Tg. Nef Targura Neofiti I Tg. Ong, Targurn Ongplos Ty: Pes Targun Pseudo Jonathan Th Yer 1 ‘argon Yerusabri 1 Tp. Yer I ‘Targum Versabai HE Yom. Ti. Yemenite Targum Orders and Tractates in the Mishnah, Tosefta and Talmud Same-named tractates in the Mishns ovefta, Babylonian ‘Talmud and Jerusalem Talmud are distinguished by 4 ty banc y respectively, ‘bot ‘Abot Nasir Nazir ‘Arak, ‘Araki Nor Nevdavim ‘Abt. Ze ‘Abude Zara Ney Nega ion B, Bat. Babe Batra Nes Necigin Bik, Bekorot Nid. Nidan Ber Beralot het, Oholot Bese Besa (= Yom Tod) 08 ‘Orte Hil Bikkewrime Para Para 2 Mes, Babe Mesia Pra Pea B Quin Baba Qamma Pasa Pesahin Dent Domai Qianim Qiunim ‘Frubin ida. Qiddnsin ‘Feduyyot Qo. Ondesin Git Giuin Ros Ha. Roi Hasvana Hag. Hoagiga Sanh. Sanhedrin Hal Halla Sab, Sabbat Hox Horayot Seb. Sabie Hut, Helin Setniot Kelim Keli Satin Kew Krritot Sota Ketub, Kelubot Subka Kil Kivayie Tan Ta‘anit Ma‘al, Ma‘aderot Yami Tame Mat. Mabkot Tenware Makes. Makiirin (=Masgin) Torumot Meg. Moyitle Toharot Mei Metta Tebul Yor Menah. Menahot ‘Uysin Mid. Middos Yadayin Migs Miguaa’ot Yebrem, Yebamnot Most Moved Yorua Yona (= Kippur) Mo nd Qat Mo'ed Qatan Zatin Zabin Maas. Seni Ma'aer Seni Lelrals. Lebahime Nasi Nagin tet Zaratin xx ABD. ABQ. ABRAbbrev Other Rabbinic Works Pai Praga Habeath or Sot ds Rabbi Nathan Pasig. Rat Kal Prsigta de Rab Kieleona Ber Agaitat Rest Phage Pinge Kalli Klecer ih, Ralylonian Robs Rablah (following abbreks- Bor Baraita tion for biblical hooks: Gen DevbieR Desh Prey Hebb Rath, = Genesis Balen) Deve 2, Desh Pres Zuta som. Semakor Gen, Crnara Signo Sip Kale Kall Sine Sipe Mek Mehta Sip. Sopeiva Mik Midna (eived with abbresiae 8. "Otaan Ra Sader “Ola Rabble tion for bible book) Tule alma Pat Patestinien ik alt Nag Hammadi ‘Tractates Aris Pot 12 Apust, ‘Me Ats of Peter and the Tuetue Masseass Marranee Apostles Mele Melhicaeh Alegrnes Aegenes Nowa The Thought of Noreo Mf es ‘Me Apaeryphon of fares On Aviat On the Anwsnuing Ys oto The Apaeryphon of Jol On Bapt. A On Bupriom A Ape, lame Ter Apuenype of Aion On hap. B (On Raprion Fp. as, ‘Thu (rt) Apocaypsn of ross On Bays. € (On Bapriso C 2 Abr. fa. ‘The Seon ipoele a James On Eush. A On ter Buchense ‘yer. Pout ‘The Apoentypse of Paul On Buch. B (On te Bucteaist B Spur. Peter Auvlyse of Pater Orig, Wordd (On te Origin of the Work Awisiius Ascleius 21-29 Prac The Paraphrose of Sho Ath Tut Autharitative Reaching PePauk The Pray of the Apostle Pat Dial, Sa The Lialaguee ofthe Sucor Pe Thanks The Pr of Tanhseiohng Dine, 89 ‘The Discourse on the Eighth Sawn The Sentences of Sestas and Ninth Ip Pat Pat The Lattrof Pir to Pip Iugrastor Exggroson de Bld avg. Sou The tomes. on the Sout Gon Bg. The Caaf of Byptions Gas. Pi, ‘The Case of Pail Gas, Tho, The Gasp of Thomas Ga, Thaik The Cashel of rath Get Pree The Canc of Our Gre Poeer Hyp. Ar The Hypastasis of te Arehons Hepsi siphon Intp, Kura The Enurprotatin of Kureeodge Periodicals, Reference Works and Serials Soph Jos. Che Seater Sh Bach. Si Tt, Truth Thom Cont Thun That, Kes, roa, Sedh Bi, Trae thin, Pro ial Ep, 2os. The Sophia of fosus Chriss The Thre» Site af Sth The Teachings of Sins The Ration of Trath ‘he Beak of Thora the Centender The Phureer: Drfl Mined The Tati om the Reowssection The Socom Treatise of the vat Seth The Tripartite Tracate Diinarphie Protein A Videminn Fasc ‘estinnos AARAS —— American Academy of Religion Acaelenny Sees AARSR Americans Acudlerny of Religion Studies in Religion AB Anchor Bible ABD Awehor BibleDietonars ed. D.N, Fever Aik American Rapist Quarto) Bh ‘Austratin Hibicad Rekeas ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library AGW AGIU AGsU Alp Nahrain ‘The Aus estament Ancient Christian Writers Arrrioan Beresastcal Reve Apheiton zur Geschichte des antikens Judentums und des Urchristemtus ya 6 rg Commentary on the New as Spiijudentums und Urchriventuns shields sxDictionary of the Later New Testament and Tis Developments jonary opi —_—_———_ EE MA ApBL ar AK ALGH) ALUOS AnBib AnBoll ANF ANRW APOr ARWAW ASNU, ATANT ATLABIDS ATR AUsBR AUSS BA BAFCS BAGD BBR BBR ac] BDB BOF BET BETL, BF BG RGU BHT BI Bib BibO Bibes BIOS) BIOS(N) BiTh BRL ays AMI America Journal of Archacology Annual of the Japanese Biblical Instiate American Joural of Theology Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschielite Arbeiten zur Literatu unel Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentumns Apa of Leeds Unisersity Overt Soriety Analeeta Biblica Analorta Bellandiana Ante Nicene Fathers, ed. 8. Roberts a J. Donaldson (10 vols; 1890 [repr. 1961}) Aurfitig wd Niedergang der vimischen Well The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha ofthe Old Tesiarnent in English, 6, RAL Chante (2xols., 1913). Abhandlungen der Rheinisch-Westalis: chon Akaclemie der Wissensehi ngen zur Theologic des Alten und Neuen Testan ATLA Bibliography S Anggican Theological Review Australian Biblical Review Andrews University Seminary Studies Biblical Archacologist The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting Bauer, W. F. Arndt, FW. Gingrich nel FW, Danker, Greeks Lexicon ofthe NT Bonner biblische Beitrige Bulletin for Bitliced Reseach Brown Classes in Judaica Brown, Driver and Briggs, Lebrew and English Lexicon of the Olt Testament K, Blass, A, Debrusner and R. W, Funk, A Gueeh Grammer of He New Testament and Othe Easly Christian Literature (Chicago: u ‘of Chicago Press, 1961) Beitrage zur evarigelischen Theologie Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologiearum, Tovaniensivm Beitriige zur Forschung Berlin. Gnostic Godiex Agyptisehe Urkundlen aus den Museen ‘ai Berlin: Griech. Urkunden I-VI (1895-1933) Reitriige zur historischen Theologie Biblical Fnterpretation Biblia Biblica ct Orientica Biblical Research Riblische Stuctien (Freiburg, 1895- Biblisehe Suudien (Neukirchen, 1951) Biblical Theology Bulletin ofthe Joh Relands University Library of Manchester Brown Judaic Studies ‘The Bible and its Modern Interpreters BR Bheo BS BSc Br ATR BTS BZNW can CahTheol Bc BQ CBOMS WCW csHy cl crm CTR GoT™M a DOR DHL, byp Biblical Ressarch Bible Review Rollingen Series Biblioteca Sacra The Bilde Translator Biblical heaton Bulletin Biblisch-Theologische Studien Biblische Untersuchungen Bildische Zeitschvift Baihefte xu Zeitschrift fir die Neutestannont licke Wissenschaft Canbridige Ancient History Cahiers Théologiqu ‘Caminidge Bible Commentary Catholic RibBical Quuarierty Cathalic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Cambricige Commentaries on Writings of the Jewish and Christian World 200 he wan, 200 Ghrurch Dogmaties, Ka Basth Commentaire Evangélique de la Bible Cambridge Greck Testament Com mentary Chacsch History Corus tnseriptionnn Graccaram AI (18281877) Corpus inserphionaim iudaicarum (MN, J.B. Brey (193661952) Coxpus tnseriptionnm Latinarwm Xt (1862-1943, 2c ed, 1893-) Ganadiven Journal of Theology Commientaire du Nougeaw Testament Conieetanea biblica Conicetanea biblica Neotestamentica Coniecianea neotestamentica Claws Parrwn Graecoram, ed. M. Goorard, 5 vols, (Turnhout: Brepols, 1974-87) Corfus Pappvorum Judaicarum Classical Quarterly Churcle Quarterly Review Cahiers de la Revue Biblique Compendia rerum indaiearum ad ovum testamentum Corpus Seviptorum Christ Orientalium Corpus Seriptorunti Eeclesiasticorum Latinorum Chicago Stud Calvin Theotogicat Journat Gonccrdia Theotogiead Monthly Crisurld Theological Review Currents in Theology and Mission Communio Viatorum Dictionary of Christian Biography, ed W. Smith and H. Wace, 4-vols, (London, 187-87) jssertationes humanarum kitterarun Discoveries in the Judaean Desert ory of fuctaismAbbreviations Ee Dj pet Dns DsB DIT cB ERG par govt RG? EH EKK Bs. Bingfud xp Diidionary of fsus ond the Cospals, ed J.B, Green and S. McKnight Dictionary of Pat end His Latter, €€ RP, Martin and GF. Hawthorne Durunsiste Reviews Daily Stuly Bible Prat too tdsshrif Brudes bibliques The Expositor’s Bible Commentary Eneyepetin of Bblual Toko ea |B. Baste Exegetscad Ditionary of the New Testament, ‘ed, H, Balz and G. Schneider Exposior's Greek Testament Encoptisehe Hochsehulschiifien Evangelisch-katholiseher Korimentar aum Newen Testament Buchiridiow Lacoru Sanctorum. Document, 8, Buangeli Loca Respiientia Encyclopaedia fudaica des Bibliques EPIA Bullsin Exeropean Pentecostal Theological EWNT bap Et my rib RoocaW Fe FRA ry FRLANT cw, Gs ous ONS NTE ay to unt DA HDR Herm Asiovation Hittin “The Encydopetia of Religion, ed, M. Eline Bewnensenl Review Emory Snes in Barly Charistianity Ecumenical Suucies in Worship Esfurter Theologisehe Sehriften Evangelical journal Byangelical Quarterly Evungeische Mestogie noes Worterbac swan Newen Test vent ed, H, Halrand G. Schneider (FT, Burgpical Dictionary ofthe New Vistarnend) Exfanivor Exhitory Times Facet Books Forselung zur Bibel First Century Christians in the Greco Roman World Foundations ane Facets Fontes luris Romani Antejustiniant ‘The Foundation of Judaistn Forschungen mur Kircher und Dogmengeschichte Hiblogia Neotetanurntarie Porsclaungen 2 Religion und Literature des Alten und Neuen Testarnents Das GrofeBidltesiton Guides to Biblical Scholarship Grove Liturgical Suudies Good News Sruties Guides 10 New Testament Exegesis rnen Thovtogeal frnad Haxper's Bible Dictionary Horizons in Biblical Theology Dietionary ofthe Bide (ed, J. Hastings) Harvard Disiectations in Religion. Hera Hong une HNIC HR isms iss AITKNT HTS nur wz. ins leo. Db IDESup HE] ws int Inc: RT si IvPNTC JAC Jas BL jan JOUR Je yosr ecs BH JES pers se ys yer iPtsup JOR mR RE pRH IRs I NT JSNTSup sor JsOTSup JSPSup The Heyy ournat Haveli Harper's New Testament Commentaries History of Religions Harvard Semitic Monograph Seties Harvard Semitic Suidies Hordes heologgveles Konnmen tar ara Nenen Testament Harare Theological Scudies Hermenieutisehe Untersuchungen 2ur Theolagie Hisuerise Zetschift Tigh Bidint Studies International Critial Co Tater's Dictionary of the Bile Intepretc's Dictionary of the Bile, ‘Supplementary Voiwne Jevasl Exploration Journal Inserptiones Latinas Selctar (Berlin, 1892) Inierpretaion Tnterpreta ssues in Religion and Theology International Standard Bible Encyclopedia rex ect) InterVarsity P Commentary Jobatrch for Anibe nd Christan ioral of he American Onfenal Society parva of Biblical Literate ious! of Bilde cand Religion ‘Journal of te Cristien Bretlaen Research Fellneship "he jnrnal of Comoaricaton anol Religion. Jorn of Compraton Sociology ured Reign Jjnernal of Early Christian Sindies Jonna of Beclsiastint History ioernat of Ectrmenical Studios Jorma ofthe Evangel Theo “osernal of Fons Sis Religion Jtrna of Jens Suis Journal of Praiconial Theology Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supple iment Series Jewish Quarienty Review Jornal of Religion “jnraal of Religions ities iesraal of Religious History “sonra of Rorean Siiies oer for th Stuy of avn in the Persian, Helleisic and Rowen Peviod Jousaal forthe Study ofthe Nee Tetement “Joxsnal forthe Study ofthe New Feslewent Supplement Series Journal forthe Study ofthe Old testament Journal for the Study ofthe Old aarnent Supplement Series Journal forthe Sry of te Peudepigropha ‘and Related Liuratare Supplement Sevies Ivyum Neven Testament ntany n Commentaries ese New Testament SuistyDictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments —_—r————————eee eee Js yee Js JES(.) IISA KAY KNT KP LAE my LBS Lec LEC Lightioot/ Harmer Louw-Ni LPck. Ls} 11] iW MaraR MBIh Meyerk MFC. MM NABPRSS NAG NEB NCIB Ned ITs Neot NewDoes NG NHC NHMS: NHS. NIB NIB NICNT ani Jowrnad of Semitic Stuties Journal or Theology andthe Church Journal of Theological Studies Journal of Theological Studies (new series) “Journal of Theology for Southern Kommentar 7u len Apostolischien Vitern Kommentar um Neuen Testament Der Kieine Pauly, ed. K. Ziegler Light from the Ancient Kast, A. Delssmanin Linguistica Biblica Library of Biblical Studies Library of Christian Classies Library of Early Chiristianity The Apostolic Fathers, wan. J.B. Lightloot and J. R. Harmer, ed. and rev. MW, Holmes (2¢ ed, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992) GneleFinglish Lexicon, ed. J.P. Lowy and E.A, Nida G.W. H, Lampe, Patristic Greck Lexicon LiddellSeott-Jones, Greek-English Lexicon Lotheran Theological Journat Lauther's Works, ed. J. Pelikan and HT. Lehmann fuschener Beitrixe zw Papyrusto sehung und Antiken Rechtsgeschi Mansterische Beitrage zur TI Meyer Konmentar Message of the Fathers of the Ch J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, The Vocabulary ofthe Crock Testament, Hse ‘rate froin te Papyri and Other Non Literary Sources (1980) Moffatt New Testament Commentary A Manual of Palestinian Aramuie Tests Monographic Series of Henedictina Melita Theologica Miinchener theologische Studi La Musion Nesilé-Aland Novum Testanentum Cracce 261h ed. National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion Special Studies ‘The New American Co New Century Bible New Clarendon Bible Nederlands thcalogivch tijdschrift Nentestamentica New Docwnenas Htustrating Early Christian: itp, ed, G. H.R, Horsley New Gospel Studies Nag Hammadi Codices Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies Nag Haimmadi Studies New Interpreter's Bible The New International Biblical Com: meniary The New International Commentary mavy NIDNTT NIGTC NLG New? Noy ART NTAbh, NTC NTCom NID NTG NTOA NIK NTS Nir up NIvs: OBO. opr Oca, oc OGs OpTaT. ore PG PRS RolSRev Reolisp RevQ RGG RGRW RHE RHPR RHR RICP ro. RSH RST RTR SA on the New Testament New International Dictionary of New “Testament Theatogy New International Greek Testament Commentary New London Commentary Nowum Testammntion upplement to Novem Testemention Let nouvelle revue théndogique Neutestamentliche Abhandiangen TPI New Testament Commentaries New Testainent Commentary (Baker) DasNeue Testament Deutsch New Testament Guides Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus New Theology Review New Testasnent Sausies New Testament Theology, ed. J.D. G. Duna New Testament Tools and Orbis Biblieus et Orientalis Overtures to Biblical Theology Oriencalia Christiana analecta Oxford Classical Dietionary Onentis Graeci tnseriptiones Selectue Occasional Papers in Transtation and ‘Textlinguaisties The Old Testament Pseudspigrapha, 64, J.H. Charlesworth ‘roclamation Commentaries Palestine Exploration Quarterly Patrologiae Graeca, ed. J-P. Migne. 168 vols Patristic Grech Lexicon, ed. G. W. HI. Lampe Patologia Latina, ed, JP. Migne. 207 vols, Perspectives in Religious Studies Publications of the Stadium Bibliew Franciscanum, Collcetio minor Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series Quaestiones Disputatac Quartertyfournat of Speech Reallesibon fdr Antike und Christentim Rene biblique Reablineyelepie de clasischen Altortums. iwissenschafl, ec, Pauly-Wissowa Religious Studies Review Revircw and Expositor Revue de Qumran Religion in Geschichte wnd Gegenurart Religions in the Graeco-Roman World Revue d'Hisioine ectésistique Rese dhistoive et de philasophie retigieuses Reaue de Uhistoie des religions Revue de Unstitut Catholique de Paris Restoration Quarterty Recherches des science religieuse Regensburger Studien zur Theologie Reformed Theological Rrotowe Studia AntiquaSBFLA SBLASP SPLDS SALMS SBLRBS Schirer si sd Secon! sucT SEG SES) SFEG: srs ssp oH sur SiG! 4 SLA ss) yr syror SKKNT. 8 aM sNTW SNTSMS Sacra Pagina Studies ict Ancient Judais Studies in Ancient Medicine Stuelien sum Alton und Nene Testament Sources bibliques. Siulies in the Bible and Barly Chrivianity Stud bible franciscaa ber anrees Society of Biblical Literate Abstracts and Seminar Papers Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Society of Biblical Literacure Resources liye Biblical Sinties Society of Biblical Literauur Uiblical Study Society of Biblical LiteatereSerninar Rapes Stuuggurt Bibeltudien Siaulies in Biblical Thoolegy Sourees chrétiennes ‘Soriptn hierosobptona Siuuies in Cheistianiy ancl Jats ¥. Sela, he Hluery of the fetch Pepe Fn the Age of Jesus Chit (173 Ba Comma 133), rex. and ed. G, Vermes etal. 2 vols, Edisburgh: 197887) Studia Evaryeica Suen Exegetsh Second Gentry Sourees of Karly Christian Thought Supplementum kipigeaphienm Grace (Leiden, 1923) Suomen Ekseeyeetisen Seura Julkais ja Scinifien der Finnischen Exegetischen Gesell Sources for oh South Florida Studies in the History of Judaisen Studia Feancisel Schotien memoriae cats stale Hotleniea Ss Mire Testo Sige spo Crs 9 Tetpaig 191529) Stal a Shadi in Jain in Late Antiquity Sanplesspete foul For ak study of) Sinha Ti Sith fal of Tn cid Per A. Hoppe toni Sega Raho ches eter 198) Soe Large Saeco nd Stain the New Teste on it ‘word Soeityo e amen Shudies Mono: sNTU so sorer sv sp SPP st 8s SSEIC SSRH sus st Seb Siuttit Student SUNT swyr 1B TBC at rat 1D TGR ros VEIL THKNT u a] (na) Tie TL TNTC vor TPINTC To TRE Thu srt olay rt 7wor Tals 1 UgsNT Ucos SOR raph Series Siualien zum Nenen estamenc unel seiner Unwolt Syntodueestoenses Stuslics in Ole Testament Biblical Pheology Studia Paivsice Siudia Poe Bioioa Siaulien zur Palneographie 1md Papyrus. kunde Sines im Religion impostiny Sevies ilies in Seviprane in Barly Judaism aed Chvistianiy Socinogival Studies in Roman History Studia teatogice Shia Biblice of Threleica Stulia heat Strack and Billerherk, Komauntar sum Neuen Testaont Studia Linogca Stein Neniestamentica Sturlien: zur Unwelt des Neuen Testa Sinatucestern fora of Theology Theologiscle Biicherel ‘Torch Bible Commentaries Thetogische Bliter The Bille 'todoy Theetogy Digest ‘Translate Docaononts af Coser cn Roe, 4, RK Sherk Theclagicad Dictionary of the Now Testament, ed, G. Riuel and G, Friedrich Theologische Kxistonz heute, new series Theologisehe Hand kommentar zum Newen Testament Theological Inquiries Twinity Journal (new series) Thesnctms Lingwas Graceae Phelogiche Lieracurceting Tyndale New Testament Commentary Theology Occasional Papers ‘Trinity Press International New Testa- ment Commentaries Theologische Qnartalschnpt Dheclogisrhe Beokenendicpidie Theologische Rundschar Pheclogicel Studies ESP Baton. Phealogy Today Texte und Untersuchungen Pheokrgical Wordivok of te Old testament Byndale Bulletin Pheotigiche fats United Bible Societies Cnt New Testament University of Cambridge Oriental Studies Uinton Seminary Quarteriy Reaewonary of the Later New’ stament and Tts Developments 0 ve Vigiliae Christianae Vcsup pplements to Vigiliae Christiana Voxtiv Vax Evamgrtice ve Nets Pstamertuon VTSup Vetus Pxtanentiin Supplements WA Ausgabe WBC ommentary way Wasleyann Theotogieal Journal WMANT —— Wissenschaftliche Monographien um Alten und Neuen ‘Testament wec, Westininster Pelican Commentary wiy Wesiminser Theological fournat WONT Wissenschafiliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament ZBNT 7KG “TK anw PRB ae, Zavicher Bibelkommentare: Neues Testament Peitschift fur Kinchenguschicte Zeitschnft fr uthonsche Theologie und Kirche Zeitschrift fdr de newtestamenitcie Wisen schaft ‘Zonilervan Pictorial Eneyelopetia ofthe Bible, ed. M. C. Tenney Heitschsif itr Papyrologic wna Epigraph ‘Deitch ir Religions- und Geistesgscichto Zaechacus Stucies: New Testament Leitshcift ft Systematische Theologia Doiwschaif fis Theologie wre Kivehe Leitch fit wissenschaptiche Taeolagie Transliteration of Hebrew and Greek HEBREW Consonants GREEK A=A a=a B=B B=b TeG yo'g A=D d=d xxi w Ret Neb Long Voxwels (= = ph X = Ch x= ch Short Vowels Vary Short Vocwels “ (if vocal) : ye = me vy = ng ay = au ev = eu i ou = ow ; ut =yi !Contributors nD, Awcite Profesee Padus Theotogical Seaminoy, Par, Pennayhnnia, USA: Land in Kay Chisthal Melchizedck; Mose: Amok), Cliston E, PhD. Professor ‘of New Testament, Talhot Shu of Theos Lt Mala, Caifoun USA: Cebters oF Ciratianiy: Mage and Astrology; Power: Satan, Devi Syueveten Faker, Willi K., PLD, Professw of New Testament andl Grek am Bib Chuisian Collage, Hosa Me so, USN: ndurance, Persever ance! Tempation Vell, Paul W, PD. Bishop of ‘Noith Sydney, Angliesw Chueh Diocese of Sydney Syeucy, New South Wales, stalin: Apostays Satation, Barts, 8. Scot, Ph, Director, TUGLA Center for te Sy of Roti Fon and Adjunct Professor of Cini ti Ong wa Relgfons, Department of Isto University of Californss, Los Ange les, Lo Angeles, California, USA: ‘Natrathe Crtelsn Sve, Slavery ‘Barta, Stephen C., Ph.D. Lecter i New Testament, Universy of us Ghani. Bauckham, Richonel J, PLD Proles ‘of New Teste Ses, sees PSL Anes, St Andes, UK Apccrypl and Pecudepig- pha! Writings 2 Peter Relatives fens Ibeagley, Alam. FAD teton, WIM toa Park Refocmed Ghar’, Wil ton Path, Ne Vor, LISA: Babylon Betsts, Dragon. Sex, Conc: Mo tif Bow Serolly, Sale Trasspets Beale, Gregory K, PH.D, Profesor of New Testament ane Divecton of the TAM. in Biblical Theology Pro gem, Gono Cen wel Thdogieal Seminary, South Hamsiton, Massy ‘rivets, USA: Bachntalogy. sles Murray, Goocge R, DD, 1D Profan if New Teatarnent yeas, The Soxkher apts “Theological Senin, Lane Keniucy, USA: Revelalon, Rook ot blaeeba, Barry 1, Ph.D, Professor, Aint nation Col Dine, Brey B,D. trie Acris, Matty Open, Minncap I, Minmesots, LSA: Arehieetare, sey Churels: Food, Food Laws, Tae Felowhip. woe, Darvel PhD, Roweareh Poe fessor for New Tester Sis, Dali Thectogi Seminary, Oak 1s, Tens USN: Old Testament in Ass burge, Gary ME, PD. Henkes of New Testament, Wheaton College, Wheaton, lines UNA fon, tervets Caer Koei, Nancy, Ma. Dei st of New Tertunet, Onto ‘Theological Semivuey, Now York Ontario, Case. Ancestors Abra- ham Copel, Willam 8 Ph.D. Reader in Religious an Theologieal St ies Weathill Calkye, Universi of Biraiinghan, Birminghaan, UK ‘Chur at Israel People of God. CCamates aac}. PID, Avista Pro Dinece vor of Higa Chore Sie, Fuller Thontojeal Seminary Pasadena, Calor, USA: Mere (Capes Dave 8, PD. Assocate Pro- Tessor, Houston Rapist Univers Howton, Texas, USA: Preexistence, Gonagouni Chrys TD, Arse aie Presse 0! New Festanent “Exegesis, Department of Theology amd Univenniy Lind, Sweets Rae veah Reveladon: Stone, Comer Caton, D. A. Pe.D. Reseach Prater ‘ovo New Tenbunes, Tiny at slical Divinity Schoo, Beerfce lots, (8A: New'Teatarment The logs comme, Amin. Ph.D. Asweine Profesor, George Fox University Pia, Orin, USA ship: Gospel; Graces Trach Twelve ‘Trhene Charles, J Daryl, PD. Assiamt Prov fers of Religfon, intr Univer sity, Upland, Inca, USA: Nomeanonica! Wridng, Caton ia the General Epistles; O1 Tost iment in General Fats, CChilon, Brats D, PLD, Bernard I dings el Professir of Religion sand Chaplain ofthe College, Bard College, Annandal-on hha, eon Vink, USA; Pusiy and Tp rn Syuagogwes Ternple Cafort Philp W, Ph.D. Lit et Phil Senor Elite: Ty Palas al Adjunct Proton, ke Mie inky pac opal Sen Davis, Peter H..PhD, Diector of Studies, Shows Mitel Shy Asta: Anon Ger ters ing Frith nd Works Healing = Miracles in Acts, Tongs, Signs and Wonders. Dies, Glenn N., PLD, Rector: 8: Takes Angin Chae, Mt Sly, Neve Sone Wale, iy Sacrifice, OFTerings, Cit T95- De (ace Bowls PRD. Farle ‘Dirty al Oriental Stes, Universiy of Cambige, Cam brie, UK: Crean Svs, David, Pi, Assn Pe ewan New Tester, Aaland “Tae Seminary, Asta Old, USA: Klann Enluone micnt Henven, New Heavens Repo: tance, Second Repentance; Visions, Ecstatic Experience Dod, Gian J, PhD, Aswan Poti sot of Leadership ane Assorate Di ‘eet, Det of Minty Program Asbury Theological Seranary, Wit amon Kenney, USA: Mla Ulvesasn; Wor Drm, Join W., D.D. Diectons Gea Iie for the Soy of Chieianity el Contenporary Sade, Unversity ‘of Sct, String, UR: Son oF Godt Sanehip, Chi, Cizen. Dana, Jamies D.G., BD, Lightfoot Durham. Dasha, UK: Pscudepl raphy; Pauline Legacy and Sebool, san, Brg J PhD Inter, Re gent College, Varaconien Biih Co Uninetty of Tabla, Cvs Fath Fathfiness; Hopes Name. yaa, Calg A PRD, Director of (Geulste regen i lea! Sad Jegund dae Dead Sea Seels Int jay Wester Univer sh Coun, Cana anity ad JudasDictionary of the Later New Testamaent and Its Developments of te Ways Jinn, Post A.D. 705 “Thomas Gospel of, Fenton Hxeret, Ph.D, Profewor Emerg, Absent Chrbtat Dae sity, iene, Texas, USA OL Tet ment in Apostolic Fathers Religions, Greco-Roman. Foy Sirphers Be, PD, Associate Broe Testor of Theology, Lepoln College in Babine, Balsnore, Maysland, CSA: Pw and Belin in et ruler, Ruth ML, PhD. Aeljanet Frofes ov, Aaa Pac University, Ava (Cito, LISA: Mewar: Giles, Kevin N. ThLD. Vieus, St Me ‘hhl's Chel, North Calon, Vie tori Asean Chueh Ghee Order, Government Propleys Prophets, Flee Prophets Dail Ju Mh, Lei ‘New Testanient an Grek, Gh ir ae Colle. ant Henoaay Lecturer in Theology and Religious Sie, The Univeniy of ago Glasgoss, UX: Watefalaess Green, Joel 8, PRD Proves ‘New Testainemt futerpretto lout’ Tineologeal Seminary, Wi more, Kents USA: Aes af the Apostles; Corning Peter, Gospel Guihiie, George H., PhD. Associate Profetur of Chien Staiog,U raha lon Univers, Jackson, Tennesse, USA: Old Testament in Hebrews iagoer Deal A, Pa. George Bb ‘ou Lav Peooror of New Test Stent Pl Thenlogial Sevan, Pmalesn, Calfornia USA: Apos Colt Fathers, Jewish Chelan. Hansen, G, Waker, ThD, Digecor oF the Global Regent nite nd Asurite Profesor of New Testic stent Fuller Theological Seminars, tlre Calforna, USA: Autor iy. Hiasthonne, Gerald P, PRD. Emer ‘ni Profs of Cee, whew Galle, Wheaton, Mino, USA Holy, Holiness: Holy Spins joys Melk of Sardi Herig, EAA. PRD. Inatrsetor ‘New Testes and Mission, AZ Pacitic University, Ana hia, SA! Giana Chit i, Crag Cs, DAP Asocine Por Fess of New Testament, Wesley THheaigea Seminany, Washing DCs USA Helles Hellenic and Hellenzticjewish Chietianity Molaes, Michael W., PL.D. Profesor ‘of Bibles Stadios and Hy Chr awuiti iy ete College, Se. Pak, Me acta, USA Barnabas, pat of ‘Gleavent of Romie; Didachey Her. ‘ns Shephord of Hains of Ant sols Plycarp of Sige Hunt Steven A. MEGS, PHD Cat Aaijanet Profesor o Biblical Stee Jes lethel College, Se a, Minne fo, LISA: Light and Darkness Hirst Lincobn D,, PhD, Acie roles af Roig Sti, Uke ‘ety of Califerin, havi, Caifi tin UIs Poy Hl Pa Quen Hardy We, PhD. Professor of New Testament Lange, Liters ue ard Theol. The Universtiy of Baioburgh, Eainbungh UN heotogy Jolusson, David Tl, PhD. Profese a ‘New Tetaien, Providence Thee: Focal Serinary, Oterburie, Min Joba, Cnt Amurance Bless Fest, ener rig. PhD. Visio Boo- Tess of New Featament, astern [bape Thenduglel Seminary, Pike ‘elphia, Penowehni USA: Earn Marriage, Hivnece, Adultery: Shep herd, Fock: Won ancl Man. Kien, Spoon, th, Prolene of New Testament, Faller Theobopal Smt Pasadena, California, USK Kingdom of Gea ein, Willian W,. PD, Proteases of ‘New Tesanient and Aesocite Act temic De, Dene Semin Dever Cokado, USA: Bleetion- knight, Jones NC PLD. Reveaseh Asstant to dae Balop of Ely Lh (Can Uk: Aloeandts, Alexam tian Christan. ici Ley fs PD, Tater of New Testament, Regent's Fark College, University of Oxford, Osford UK: Kroeger Catherine © Adjunct soe ‘ats Profewuared Clie and Min in Ses, Gensou-Convell Theoloia! Sern, South Hawk ton, Massacbsets, US Women {he Feely Church, Kruse, Colla G., Ph.D. Lecturer ‘New Testament bk: Calle Victoria, Lif, Victoria, Attra I Aponte, Aposteship: Minky: Servants Service, ray, ow, PAD, Anita Px Fess of Bible, Mood Tite tas Lae, Chie Mins, USA: Lora ayy Peace. Laue, Winns ba Th Pal 1 Wall ‘rolessor of Hibical Stale, Seatte Pract Unversity, Seat, Wastin ton, USA: Hebsews Larkin, Wiliam J, Joy Maa feesnon ‘of New Testament and Creek, Co: Tox til Senay ne Grate Schoo! of Missions, Go USN: A ai, Sot Car Lm, Dav 8. Ph.D. txecuve ton, Chins Mins Interna Alona Malipies, Quezon Cy MewoDtanila, Philippines: Brangel- Ju i dhe Haely Cure Lnvaln, Atlee T, PhD, Senior Pro- enor of Nev Testament, Wile Callege, University of Toren, ‘ante, Ontario, Cala Ponte Lae, Lynn A Ph.D. Asc Fes of New Testament, Haggard ‘Graduate Schoo! of Thedvoyy Aisa Pacific Univesity, Aas, Cae fort, USA: Mark, Soret Gospel of. Leen A Boyd, ThiD, Asiodate ‘rolem of ible, Cedarve Co Icy, Cedarville, Obi, USA: Marie do Savion Maier Pat 1, PRD, Presse of Hs tory, Weaterny Miia Univesity, Xalaasaaco, Michigen, LSA" Chee nnlogy. Marshall, Howat B.D. Proto fo New Fesivnent Exegesis, Unless siy of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UR: Redemption Marin D, Michacl, Ph.D, Profesor ‘of New Testun Stale, Co (Gate apis Theoegieat Seon Mill Valley, Califo nia, USA: Philo, Mastin, Ralph P, Ph.D. Distinguished Sellar in Relient lex ‘Theological Seminary Pasadena, Cains Hoggan Gada Sehiooh of Theetogy, Maas Paite Union, Ar, Califor and Lg Evangelical Seminary, ED Monte, Califor, USA Bary Ca lic; Worship snd itor. Manav, Pedsito U..EaD. Brow “essoe of Biblical Siudies ana Mie logs, Walla Wala Calle, Celleye Place, Washington, USA. Forgive MeCaviney, Dau G, PhD, Asset Profesor of Nex Tene, Wes aninscer Theoleglel Sem na Pidcllphia, Penns, Coneionco; House, Spiritual oases Houselol, Family MeDuna Lee M., PhD, Senor von Firat apis Cre, Aa Galiovnia, and Adjunct Profesor fof New Teetirnen Ste, Fler Thelogta Califo Meknight, Se Profesain North Park nos USA: 6 sion Mati Michaeis J Ra mest, So Unerats§ USA: OMT 1Peter Moti Laon Irourne Vis Mot Spon Chae ire Wea Be SW Cha Au Moog, Step don Be Cl (roe, Neva, Cure Profesor oN Seu ry Leu Covenant, New God; Jere ighicoumean Nol Sephen fy Dean fr cal feo ot Be Upc Sn See Pon cen Mn Npacom, va Dare of Bi fal Susy Not Director oft Shi Chiao, Jovi Omar, Crt Ry of Now Tete £1 Dinky St 2, USA Me Pact, Alan GD Religion sed hi sik Uren A Uste Alan Page Terence 0h feser of New Te Houginon Galle. Nev nk Sh Sp Prints John, PhD oF Theo 3 Theoogil Gene Univers Caner ayia terry a tir, Coma. Pave Arar CP feo of Ne Tn Director Fle Se 1 Caller, Men 1s, USK Knowl Wisdom, mList of Contribton Iheolagia! Seminary, Hacer, Califia, USA: Cant, Mekinight, Soot, PD, Karl A. Oleon Professor i Religious Std, North Park University hie, Hh ‘it, USA: Gentes, Cente Mis son; Matthean Commune. Michael. Ramsey, Th. Professor ris, Snthiest Missa Sate aise Springiel, Miso USA’ Old Testament in Revel Peter Marti, Leon Ia, Ph.D. Retired, Me: ‘Mou. Stephen, PhD. Paster, Co- ‘hosed Unied Metis Curly Wiest Bridgewater, Massachusers, USA Givi Authority. Motye, Stephen, PRD. Lecter, La hw be Callege, Laon, OR: oss, Theology of tho. Newnan, Cary ©, PID. Resew'ch Drofestor of Nev Testament, The Smhern Basing Thealogie Sen rary, Louille, Kentucky, USA: CCenenent, Nev Covenant Clryy God Jerusalem, Zion, Holy Cit Righteousness. Noll Stepica F, PhD. Associate ‘ean for Academe fits an Ye Fest of Biblical Studs, Trinigy pec School fir Bins A brig, Pennsyania, USA: Angels, Heavenly Heings Angel Christology, Nsom, David P. PhD Chait = Petr of ira and Theo fal Stidies, North Pate Univers, Ditector of faite for liian Studies, Chicago, linos, USNs Jovephus Osborne, Graat R, Ph.D, Professor DE New Festament,Trtsy Henged ‘al Diviniy School, Deere Ml il USA! termeneation Padget, Alan G,, DI. Provessor of Religion and Philosophy, Amis USA: Marion ge, Tovence R, Ph.D. Associate Pro. Fear cf New Testament Houghton Coley Houyginy, ‘Ne York, USA: Spi Taine, Joln, PLD. FAHA. Profesor of Theol, St Marks Nation Thera Contre, Cau Site Univers, Canberra, satel Capital Tevtivany, Austra: Cra tion, Cosmo. otin AWA G, Ph.D, Aworiite Poo esr ot New Testnvent sn Ate Ditto, Faller Seana ia Neath fm Caer, Mena Pk, Califor tia, USA: Knowledge: Mystery, Wisdoo, ate Profenot of New Testament, Am Pate Uniriy, Ani, Cal Torna, USA Hymne, Songs oli Jo, PD, Je Be Tarn Profesor of New Testament, Sete fm Hapris Theolopieal Seminary, Lousille, Kentucky, USA: ery gma and Didocney Pride and Hm Portes Stinky By PID, Proenor of ‘Theology an Head ot the Depaa- nem! oF Theology nel Religens Swiiex Ractampon latte Lote dls, Landon, UK: Berni, Bier als Fear; Sin, Wickedanst ‘Tribulation, Messlanie Woes; rally Destruction. ‘New Testanent, Nov Am opie Seminary, Sous alls Suh Dako, USA: olstrys Lo 98 Chris. puke, Heian MPD, Asian Poe fessor of New Fesiament, North set Bayt Clee ant Seay, Langley, British Cokwnbia, Cana ows Empire, Cheiae and hes Rome snd Rowan Cheatin. Reasener Mark, PD, Associate Cn fessor of Biblical Studien Bethel Caieye, St, Minna, US Bnmperor, Eaiperor Cut; Perscew- Ree, Jeli T, PhD. Red ‘Wank USA Tea Reid, Daniel, PhD, Senor alr RReferente nal Asleade Bows, terns Press, Downers Grove, lk hiss, USA: Pella, Fgh Views sand Vices, Gand, Adjunct Lectnes Canadian Ii College, Regis, Sasatee wun, Canada: Freedora, Liber, Schon, Thomas E, bara, Clara, USA: acpi Riches and Poverty Sehinabel, ekds Ph.D Daven ei of New Testament Depart ment, Gieten Theakolel Se: nary, lesen, Germ: Mision, arly Noe-Paulte Schoen, Davie M, ThD Profeser of [New Tesnnent andl Art sy for the Center for Nance! est Sali, Faller Th ary Pastena, Califor vd Teck Inga Sen thy USN: Gong Ctomn Schreiner, Fhomis R, PhD, Profi: st of Ne Tentnnicat, The Sil crn Hoptist Talogical Seminary, Tuisle, Kertachy USA: Com fence and Sefrid, Mark A. Ph.D. Associate Proe Southern Bapiist Theatogica! Sem hry Lani, Benth, 8A Death of Chit Judgment Sueguen, Gary, PD. Assocbte Cor Testor of New Testinent, Bla ‘veotaiel Seminary, ail Pennsysania, USA: Hell, Abyss, ‘ieenal Punishment Lie ond Deel; Mortality and Tenortaliy, Sater Margerte PhD. Asari Profesc af Preaching, Faller Theo legca Seminar Mavens, Cain ‘ns, USA: Preaching Irom Acts Hebyese, General Hpbules snd Revelation Spencer Seat, PRD. Avnet Pi Teowor of Reigion, Wingate College Norlh Carlin, USA it, Shanon, Gram N. iD. Profesor ‘of New Testaent Sie, King’s College, Universi of London, Low lon, UX Joss Tradidons, Sey, Jerty to, PhD, Ascine Pr fessor o€ Bille, Lexington Thea cal Seminary, Lexington, Kenai USA: Advemorle: Initaion, Sueuist, Scott W,PasD, Aseainte rates f Worl Misry an rangelion Pisburgh ‘Theolegt cl Seminary, Pah satis USN: Spi Syrian Cheha, Swirly, Wille! M, FID Academie 1 Profesnin i Ney Teta Dest rent, Astoeistd Menneite bi ‘al Sealy, Bast tnd, USA, lntertextualty in Early Chie tian Liters. "Toes Philip Hy PLD, Tanslation Contin, Unie Bible Sosetes, sna Aaunet Prose, Regent Cae loge, Vincennes, Bre Cobnarbin Travis, Skephen 1, Ph.D, Veesrinc Pil St. John’s Callege, Noung. ham, Noung, UE Payetotogy, Resurrection, esor uf New Testament, Deiat iment of Theology snd Religions Stace, Univers of Osga, Dune din, New Zealnd: Diagpara Jad he, Allen Ph.D. Evert Jan Hat B Blelink Profener of Re Fon, Hope College, Helland, Michigan, USA: Edie Wainvright, Gootliey. Du hbo, DD, Gita x tian Theobigy, Dake Univers, extDictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments, Dahan, North Carolin USA: Bap. fim, Hapdemad Rites; Loves Sup- pes Love Fens, Wl, Robert W., TD. Professor of ileal Sndies, Sale Pace Unk ‘seri Seat, Washington, USA: _Jamos, Lower of ita, ane F, P.D. Professor of Nene Testament snd Ch of ppartevet of Religion and Philos pi Malone College, Con, (Oia, OSA: Amrit: Letter Let tex Form: Rhetoric, Rhetorical (Citic Stuetarasn and Dis ‘course Anlyai Webb, Robert La, Ph.D, Lectures, Luther College, University of Regina, Regina, Seskatche ws, CConachis Day of dhe Loe Jude. wx ‘ebb, Wiliam J, HAD. Professor of ‘Nw Testun, Heviage Theologt cal Seminary, Gunbride, © Gani Sulering. ‘Melina, flliey AD, PhD. Asocite Profesor of Ne Teetaneot, Calin Thala Seminary, ean Raye fd, Michigan, USA: Diegmetus Epistle a, Wilkins Michael, PLD. Professor ‘of Nev Testament Lge a erate andl Dean ofthe Faculty ‘Tlket Schoo! of Thoolog Bi Universi, Ls Mica, Calle USA. Mil Solid Pood New Hird, Pastoral Theology Prayer Teach- fig, Parsenesis Wilivns, Dav flu, PRD. Vice Prin cipal, Ridley College, Parkville ‘ictora, Aneta Amin on the Oreates Witherington, Ben, sorof New Testament, Asbury Theo: Togfeal Seminary Wiknoe, Kemiuels, USA: Chests Lod Wright, David, MA. Senior Le turer Feelesiastical History. The Universiy of Eeinbanph, Bal Inu, Uk: Ceoeds, Confessions) Fors; Docetsms Fhionies; Sexe ity Sexual Fikes Was Jolie, Ph.D, Anedine Pres ‘Sir of Neve Tesanet, Lagos Evan ‘glial Semsinary, Ht Monte Caloris, USA? Fymns, Songs ‘Liturgeat Hlernon Mar Pht, Protes ABBA. SeeLin ABRAHAM Akey figure in c played a eentral ans and the Ro: NT authors cor significant ways 16-17, 32; 13:26) 7:1, 2, 4-6, 951 James* (Jas 9:21 References to Al documents of th gests that che pal tance for early C 1. Abraham 2, Aets: Abral Gon 3. Hebrews: A for Relieve 4, Jomes and pleas Exan 5. Apostolic Ki Disinherite 1. Abraham the Es For those Jews whe Jon, Abraham of teristics of the ide Jewish literature of the OT accounts 25:11), they abso ¢ speak to the reade ‘our primary ¢ Pam in ea ons monotheist and th Ant, 6.43 Josephiis A 68-71; Afoc. Ab I nant® with Abralan dants are blessed | Ant. 7.4; 1QapGen §ABBA. See LivurcicaL EMENTS. ABRAHAM Akey figure in early Jewish literature, Abraham played a central part in the letters to the Gala: tiansand the Romans (s#DPL, Abraham). Later NTP authors continue to employ Abraham in significant ways in Acts* (Acts 3:13, 25; 7: 16-17, 32; 13:26) and Hebrews* (Heb 7A, 2, 4-6, 9; 11:8, 17) and to a lesser degrec James® (Jas 2:21, 23) and J Peter* (1 Pet 3:6): References to Abralram are found in numerous arly church, a fact that sug> gests that the patriarch held continued impor- tance for early Christian selfunderstanding. 1, Abraham the Exemplary Jew , Acts: Abraham the Father of th Continuity with Beli ‘Ss 3, Hebrews: Abraham the Prototype of Faith for Believers 4.James and | Peter: The Patriarcha ple as Examples of Obedient Behavior 5. Apostolic Fathers: Adopted Christiai Disinherited Jews documents of the Jews in Gou- nicl 1, Abrabam the Exemplary Jew. For those Jews who returned from exile in Baby- lon, Abraham often exemplified the charac- teristics of the ideal Jew. While authors of early Jewish literature often based their writings upon the OT accounts of Abraham (Gen 11:27— :11), they also elaborated them in order to, speak to the readers of their éay. Four primary themes emerge about Abra- ham in early Jewish literature. He isa tenacious monotheist and the first proselyte to Judaism (jub. 11:6-17; 12:1-5, 16-21; 20:6-9; Ps-Philo Bib. Ant. 6.4; Josephus Ant, 1.7.1 $§154-57; Philo Abr 68-71; Apor, Ab. 1-8). God established a cove- nant with Abraham through which his descen- dants are blessed (Jub, 15:5-10; Ps-Philo. Bib. Ant, 74; 1QapGen 21:8-14), although one must obey the stipulations of the covenant in order to remain within it (fud, 15:26-27), Abraham's character is often extolled as righteous (Abe L:IA), hospitable (7. Abr 1:1-84; Philo Adr 10 110; Josephus Ant, 1.11.2 §196), virtuous (Josephus Aut, 1.7.1 §154; Philo Ady 68), faith- fal (Sir 44:20; 1 Mace 2:52; Jub. 1717-18), a lover of God (Jub. 17:18) and a friend of God (CD ). Abraham lived according to the Mosaic law (Jud, 1521-2; 16:20; Sir 44:20) or the natu ral/philosophical law (Philo Abr 36), and he praises those who die for keeping the law (4 Mace 13:13+18). 2. Acts: Abraham the Father of the Jews in Continuity with Believers. In Acts Abraham is used not so much as a prototype for Christians to be emulate in the Pauline epistles, but he remains the ther of the Jews. Using Abraham exclusively his sermons, Luke establish continuity between Abraham and dhe events about which he is writing (Dahl, 140) 2.1. Adts 3, Peter uses the figure of Abraham, during his speech in Solotnon’s portico to iden- Lily the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Acts 3:13, 25; ef, Acts 7:52; Ex 3:6) as the God whose “servant” Jesus was (see Service) and through whose name* Peter had just healed the lan beggar (Aets 3:6, 16). The usage of the uncom- mon and carly title servand (cf. Acts 3:26) for Las he connection and _Jesus here may indicate that an allusion is being made to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah (Is 52:18—58:12). By using this appellation Peter clearly implicates the Jews as those who killed Jesus, the chosen servant of their own God (Acts 3:15) Yet in Acts %:25 Peter invokes the blessing to Abraham that through his seed all the fani- lies of the earth would be blessed (Gen 22:18; 18:18; Gal 3:8). The Septuaginthas ions” (ethne), which could be interpreted to en 1Abraham mean Gentiles.* Peter instead uses the ambigu- ‘ous “families” (patria), which probably refers first to Jews (cl. Acts 3:26) and implieidy to Gentiles, Thus Peter tells his listeners that they are the descendants of the prophets and the covensant that foretold the Messiah, Jesus (Acts 28), who himsel!'was the fulfillment of the covenant with Abraham through whom the Jows and other families may be blessed. 2.2, Aets 7. Stephen’s* speech provides the framework for several allusions to Abraham (Acts 7:2-8, 16-17, 82) in which he appearsas the recipientof promises* by which his descendants later benefit Luke’s affinity with Hellenistic Judaism* is seen most clearly in Acts 7:28 (Dahl, 142). In Acts 7:2 Stephen places God's call to Abraham in Ur rather than in Haran (Gen 12:1). Luke's tradition could be drawn from OT texts (Gen 15:7; Neh 9:7) that suggest the call from Ur Philo® assumes that a divine call came to Abra- ham in both places (Philo Ab; 62, 85), while Josephus* sees the ovo migrations as a single exodus (Josephus Ani, 1.7.1 $154), Luke further remarks (Acts 7:4) that Abraham left the cour try of the “Chaldeans,” 4 term that often re- ferred to astrologers and the interpreters of dreams (Jub. 11:8; Philo Abe 69, 71), traditions connected with Abraham before his call (Jub. 12:16; Philo Abe 70; Josephus Ani. 1.7.1 $1563 Apioe. Abr. 7:9; cf. Josh 24:2) Ina free rendering of Genesis 17:7 Stephen remains true to the Genesis account in which Abraham possessed no land but received only a promise of land (Acts 7:5; ef. Gen 12:7; 13:15; 48:4) for himself and his offspring, Abraham followed God although he neither took ewner- ship of any part of the land (ef, Deut 2:5) nor yet had his descendants who would eventually inherit the land, While authors sometimes mag- nify Abraham’s taking ownership of the land (1QapGen 21:15-19), Stephen instead magni- fies Abraham's trust in God (cf, Rom 416-22) By including references to the prophecy to Abraham about his descendants’ four-hundred- year (Acts 7:6; cf. 3al 3:17) bondage in Egypt (Gen 15:13-14; cf. Ex 2:22) Luke em- phasizes God's faithfilness (v7 Faith) to hi people in the midst of crisis. Inan expansion of Exodus 3:12 (Acts 7:7) Luke modifies the term mountain (hors), used for Sinai in the Septua- gint, using instead “place” (topos), referring to Jerusalem* or the temple* itself (cf, Acts 6:18- 2 14), God’s faithfulness to his promise to Abra- ham is demonstrated in that Stephen and his Jewish contemporaries in Jerusalem could wor- ship God in that very “place.” Stephen then refers to the “covenant of cir- cumeision” (diucheke peritomes; Acts 7:8) estab- lished with Abraham (Gen 17:10, 12), covenant that confirmed God's promise to grant him descendants (Gen 21:14), who ins clude his liste Stephen returns to Abraham when he sug gests that Jacob, Joseph and his relatives were buried al the cave Abraham bought near Shechem (Acts 7:16). In Genesis Abraham bought the cave of Machpelah (Gen 23), not Shechem. Jacob is reportedly buried in the cave Abraham bought near He- bron (Gen 49:29-82; 50:13), while Joseph was buried at Shechem (Josh 24:32) in land that Jacob had bought (Gen 38:18-20). Stephen may have telescoped the two accounts of purchases of land in Canaan as he telescoped earlier events (see Acts 7:2, 7) and has attributed the purchase of the grave in Shechem to Abraham, 2.3, Acts 13, During his speech in the syna- gogue* of Antioch of Pisidia on his first mission- ary journey, Paul refers to his Jewish listeners as “Abraham's family,” to whom the message of salvation* was sent (Acts 18:26), Paul calls upon them to be different from the residents of Jeru- salem who rejected the Messiah, Jesus, and [ile filled the message of the prophets (c.g., Isa 52:13—53:12) by condemning him to death (Acts 1:27.29). It was through David's people, those chosen in Abraham, that their Messiah had come (Acts 15:22-25), The Jews tragically would later reject the message of salvation (Acts 13:45). Hebron 3. Hebrews: Abraham the Prototype of Faith for Believers. Abraham functions in the letter to the Hebrews as the prototype of faithful endurance* that the believing readers are to emulate. 3.1. Hebrews 2:14-16. In the context of shows ing how the Son of God has solidarity with the human family by virtue of having become one of them (Heb 2:14), the author of Hebrews first uses the figure of Abraham to identify those whom Jesus Christ came to liberate (Heb 2:15- 16). ‘Those who are now called descendants of Abraham are those who are of the faithful rem- nant (cf. Is41:8-10) , oppressed men and womenAbraham of whom Jesus takes hold to deliver from the bondage to Satan* and to bring them under the authority* of the exalted Son (see 3.2. Hebrews 6:13-20. In, this passage G promise of descendants to Abraham (Heb 15; Gen 12:23; 15:5; 17:5) isbroughtto the fore, The author repeats a phy of Ise concerning an oath God swore “by himself” (Heb 6:13; Gen 22:16) because there was no one greater by who: (Heb 6:16-17) in order to guarantee the prom ise, The author reminds the readers of the popular tradition of the Agedah, or binding of Isaac, reinforcing the por of Abraham as the prototype of faithful endurance (Heb 6:15) who in obedience* was willing to sacrifice his onlyson, thereby receiving God's promises. The exposition provides an example for the address- ces to emulate in the expectation that they will receive what God has promised them because their own high priest, Jesus Christ, has already obtained the promises and is a forerunner on their behalf (Heb 6:19-20), 3.3, Hebrews 7:1-10, Within his broader goal of proving that Jesus’ priestly office is greater than the levitical priesthood, the wr prets the account of Abraham and Mel chizedek* (Gen 14:17-20; cf, Ps 110:4) in order to show how Melchizedek is greater than Abra ham and the levitical priests (Heb 7:7). His proof lies in the account of Abraham the ex- alted patriarch (Heb 7:4) giving Melchizedek a tenth of the spoils of war (Gen 14:20). Beeause the levitical priests received tithes (ef. Lev 18:21; Num 18:26-28; Neh 10:38.99; Josephus Ant 20.9.8 $181; 20.9,2 §206-7; Josephus Life 15 §80) and because Abraham represented the Levites as the progenitor of Israel,* this fact signifies that Levi was actually tithing to Melchizedek (Acts 7:56, 8-10), who is thereby even greater than Israel's progenitor, Itis notelearis who gave tithes to whom, but the author of Hebrews reflects the tradition that Abraham was the one who tithed (ef. 1QapGen 22:17. Josephus Ant, 1.10.2 $181). ‘The author further provides a contrast between Abraham, who re ived promises (Acts 7:6), and the Levites, who received their office according to the law (Acts: 735). For the author promise connotes some- thing effective and certain (see Acts 6:13), while the law implied that which was ineffective, Thus the contrast between Melehizedek and the le- vitical priests heightens Melchizedck’s pricst- se from the sacrifice" God could swe Genesis hood because the leviti tithes according to kaw while Melchizcdek re ceived tithes from and blessed the one to whom God had made promises (Acts 7:6) and towhom he is superior (Acts 7:7) 3.4, Hebrews (128-12, 17-49. In this chapter the author employs Abraham more than any other figure as an example of faith, Abraham first exemplifies his faith by his obedience to God's call (Heb 11:8; Gen 12:12; ef. Gen 15:7 Neh 9:7; Acts 7:2-8; Philo Ad: 60, 62, 85, 8) Abraham's sojourn as an alien indicates his unsettled status as a foreigner, without native and civil rights, “living in tents” (Heb 11:9; Gen 12:8; 18:3; 18:1) as a nomad. His obedience brought not immediate settlement in the prom ised land buta life ofsojourning for himself and his descendants (Heb 11:9) as he looked toward the ullimate goal. For the author of Hebrews that goul was not Canaan but the firmly estab lished city of God (Heb 11:10; ef, Heb 1:1; Ps 48:8; 87:1-3; 1s 14:82). Jewish apocalyptic* tradi- lion affirms that Abraham saw the heavenly* city (2 Apoe, Bar 4:2-5; cf. 4 Ezra 8:13-14), Abraham further exemplifies faith Uhrough his ust that God would give him a son, even though he and his wife had never produced children and were no longer physically eapable of doing so (Heb 11:11-12; cf, Rom 4:19-21; Gen [5:1 17:15-22; 18:9-15). The reliability of God is heightened in the contrast between the sin gular Abraham and ther dants (Heb 11:18 ef, Heb 1:11) in accordance th the promise (Gen 15:8; 22:17; cf. Heb 6:13-15). Finally Abraham exe his willingness (0 sacrifice his only son and fulfillment of promise, Isaac (Heb 11:17-19). This event of Abraham's testing (Sir 44 1 Mace 2:52; see 8,2 above) became central to the Jewish exegetical imagination in posthibli cal Judaism (Jub, 17:15—18:19; Philo Abr 167. 297; 4 Mace 7:11-14; 13:12; 16:18-20; Josephus Aut. 1.13.14 §292-36; Ps-Philo Bib, Ant. 18.5; 28,8; 82, 1-4; 40.2-3), Abraham's action was cele brated asa model of faithfulness:md obedience to God in the literary tradition of Jewish models of faith (Sir 44:20; Jt 8:25-26; 1 Mace 2:52; 4 Mace 16:20; cf, Jas 221-245 1 Clem. 10.7). De- tails in the presentation in Hebrews suggest that the author was influenced by this traditio The tense and sacrificial nuance of the verb offered (prosphero; Heb 11:17) suggests Ubat in I priests collected titude of his descen= plifies faith through‘Abrabam some sense the sactifice was an accomplished event because of Abraham's intention (Philo Abr 177; PsPhilo Bib, Ant, 82.4; Sweunam, 122) while the second use of the verb (Heb 11:17, the second part of the verse) indicates that Abra- ham did not make the sacrifice but was inter- rupted by God's intervention, Jewish tradition refers to blood that was shed during the fice; because of this God chose Abraham and his family (Ps-Philo Bid, Ant, 18.5-6), perhaps im: plying that the blood had some kind of atoning value. The author's reference to Genesis 21:12 (Heb 11:18) and subsequent reference to God raising "someone from the dead” (Heb 11:19; of, Pie R. FL 31) simultaneously refers to He brews 11:12, where Abraham is said to be as “good as dead” in reference to procreation, The implication is that Abraham had faith that God was able to raise someone from the dead— namely, Isaac—through both procreation and his salvation from sacrifice, The Christian read. crs would also sce the sacrifice of Isaac as a foreshadowing of God's raising Jesus from the dead. From this they could derive faith in the God who is faithful to his promises (Swetnam, 122-23, 128), 3.5. Hebrews 13:1-2. The author reminds his readers that they are to have the attitude of welcoming fellow Christians who are strangers, Hospitality was a mark not only of one who was cultured but also of Christians, who met in the homes of others. Hospitality was necessary espe- cially in regard to itinerant preachers. In the Christian community the guest/tost retatio ship auained an almost sacramental quality as they expected that God would play a significant role in the exchange between guests and hosts (Lane, 512). Abraltam, who was known for bis hospitality (7 Clem. $1; T. Abr 1:1-3A; Philo Abr 107-10; Josephus nt, 1.11.2 §196), isalluded to in reference to his meeting, to his tent at Mamre when he and his wite received the promise of the birth of their son Isaac (Heb 13:1-2; Gen 18:1-21; / Clem. 10,7) cri h the three visi- tor 4. James and | Peter: The Patriarchal Couple as Examples of Obedient Behavior. 41, James 2:21-24, Abraham, known for his exemplary faith (see 8.4 above), was also re- vered for his obedience to God for his willing: ness to sacrifice Isaac (the Agedahsee 3.2above) which was a story popular in Jewish circles (see 3.4 above). James 221-24 brings these ovo tras ditions together; Abraham becomes the exani- ple of one who completes his faith by his works (see Faith and Works). Because James 2:21 implies that Abraham was justified (dikaioo) by works and that sounds as if it contradicts statements by Paul about justification (dikaioo; cf, Gal 2:15-16; Rom 3:22) by fai ade First, the sense in which diaéod is used in James is in reference to Abralun's demonstrated faithfulness, perhaps in reference to the theme of testings (as 1:2, 12). Thus God declares Abraham “righteous” or “faithful.” Phe sense in which Paul uses dikaioo reliers to the eschatolog' cal* act in which God declares sinners rightly related to himself, Paul then can say dhat Abra- ham was made righteous by laith (Gal 3:6-9; Rom 4:22), Furthermore, the sense of “work in the two letters is different: in James it refers to acts of obedience and compassion that should arise out of faith in1 Christ (Jas 2:14-17) and that complete faith. The works (asin ‘works of the law") against which Paul builds his po- lemic of Abraham's becoming righteous by faith alone are those aets that formerly identified the people of God and that are still being used by some to ictentily the people of God in Christ Paul uses Abraham asian example of righteous- ness! by faith because he is contending with those who would undermine the foundation of ane, a few observations must be his gospel.* 4.2.1 Peter 3:4-5. Within the context of a household code* the focus is on Sarah, whose example the readers are to emulate. Itissurpris ing that the author did not reflect the situation of the OT account, in which Sarah laughs at the promise of a son, saying that her “lord” is too old (Gen 18:13; see Lord). Many of the women reading the letter (see 1 Peter) would have had unbelieving husbands, It is through their demeanor that they «ire to bring their husbands to the gospel (1 Pet 3:1-2). ‘The principle is that one influences a spouse by modest beh: ture of the time this meant that wives were to defer to the authority of their husbands, ior worthy of respect. In the cul: 5. Apostolic Fathers: Adopted Christians and Disinherited Jews. While Paul employed Abraham in order to in clude Gentile believers within the people of God, Abraham's function changed in the writAbraham ings of the early church (see Apostolic Fathers). As]. Siker has shown, Justin Martyr reverses the funetion of Abraham when he “claims the Abra hamic heritage for the Christians and denies it to the Jews" (Siker, 145). 5.1. The Revised Promises to Abraham, Early anonical Christian authors revise God's promises to Abraham in such away that Chris- tians alone become the inheritors of those promises, For example, the author of the Epistle of Barnabas (see Barnabas, Bpistle of) appes Abraham regarding God’s promise of the kind (Barn. 6.8; cf. Burn, 8.4; 9.7-8; 13.7; ef, Ex 33:1, 8) to Abrahain and his descendants. Ch become heirs of the promised land of milk and honey (Barn. 6.8, 10, 1'7) through the new crea- dont in their hearts (Bara, 614-15) through Christ. Justin Martyr sees Hadrian's banning the Jews from the city of Jerusalem (A.D, 135) as God’s punishment for their disobedience and disbelief (Justin Dial. Tryph. 16.2; ef, 40.1; 92.8 25.5). Itis the Gentiles, along with the Hebrew ancestors, who will receive the inheritance of land, particularly as symbolized by Jerusalem (Justin Diad. Tryph. 26.1). Through Christ, the land promised to Abraham's descendants ii given to Gentiles (Justin Dial, Tryph. 119.5.6) and will be established eternally at Christ's See- ond Coming (Justin Dial, Tryph. 85.7; cf. 80.5, 81.4; swe Parousia) For Justin, Christians additionally are the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham of descendanis by virtue of their faith in Christ (Justin Dial, Tryph, 11.5). The Jews are merely physical descendants of Abraham (Justin Dial, Tryph. 47.4; 80.4), which counts for nothing (Justin Dial, Tiyph. 25.1; 26.1; 44.1; ef, Me 3:9 par, Lk 3:8), Further, in Barnabas 13.7 we find that the author has reinterpreted the account in Genesis 17:4 ich God promises Abra ham that he wi father of nations,” to mean that Abraham is the father exclusively of the Gentiles. Gentiles furthermore become the fruit of God's promise to Abraham that through him the nations would be blessed (Justin Dial, Tryph. 11.5; 119.86). Abrahamn’s descendants become a blessing to the nations by becoming the na- tions (ie., Gentiles) themselves, Thus the prom- ise to Abraham that his progeny would be a. blessing to the nations is fulfilled. 5.2, Circumcision Recast. In these texts cir- stians cumcision® is also given a new meanin example, in the Kpistle of Barnabas Abrah: points to Christ through his circumcision, which was solely a “spiritual witness of the hrough the death of Jesus, not as a seal of'a grace already given” (Barn, 9.3-4, 79; Siker, 150; cf, Gal sion of the Jews in the flesh* is even seen to be the misleading of gel® (Barn, 9 Like Paul, Justi 's Abrahams jus tification by faith apart from circumcision (Justin Dial, Pryph, 11.5; 28.8-4; ef, Rom 439-10), Not only does physical circum: ail to bring righteousness, but only the spiritual circumei- sion of the heart has positive significance Justin Dial. Tryph. 11.9; 24.1; 84.1; 43.1; 67.9; 118.2), which Christians receive through baptism." Justin further states that clreum given to Abraham because God foreknew that the Jews would be disobedient, particularly by virtue of their responsibility for Jesus’ death (see Death of Jesus) those designated for punishment (Justin Dial. ‘Tiyph. 16.2-4; 19,25; 99.2.8) 5.3. Continuity Between Abraham and Christ. in Barnabas Abraham also points forward to Christ, first through his casting of Abra one who sprinkles the people for purification from sin (Barn, 8.3-4; cf. Num 19), which mean: that he was one who preached the gospel of forgiveness of sin and purification of the heart (Barn. 8.3) By using the account of the angels who visit Abrahiain at Mamre (Gen 18) and the eschato- logical banquet at which Ab (Mt 81142), Justin argues that as Christ was with Abraham at Marre, so Abraham will be with Christat the eschatological banquet (Justin Dial, Tryph, 55-59) In a response to Trypho's challenge that Justin prove the existence of another God be sides the Greator, in Dialogue 56 Justin uses a number of biblical citations to prove that it was Christ who, with the bo angels, appeared to Abraham under the oak at Mamre, not God the Father and Creator, In fact it was Jesus who appeared to Moses, Abraham and other Jewish ancestors (Justin Dial. Tryph. 113.4), The unbe- lic sion pn was umeision was a mark of mas ham is present ing Jews are not children of Abraham, for they fail to believe in the very Christ to whom Abraham bore witness, 5.4. Father Abraham. Marcion sought to ex- dude Abraham from God’s promised inhe:Abraham: tance (Irenaeus Haer 4.8.1); given Marcion’s antipathy toward all things Jewish, this is not surprising. [renacus responded by reasoning that those who disallow the salvation of Abra- ham and assume that it was another God who made promises to Abralaro, presumablyas Mar- cion did, are themselves outsicle of the kingdom of God (see Kingdom of God) because it is Abrahams seed who receive the adoption and inheritance promised to Abraham, By the time of Lrenaeus, proof-texts [rom the NT were being offered to show Abraham as the father of the Christian faith (Rom 4:3; MUS] 1; Ui 13:28), 5.5. Abraham and the Afterlife. Irenwe ludes to a passage in whieh Marcion states that the unbelieving souls of Abraham's progeny and implicitly also of Abraham remained in Hades (Irenaeus Haer 1.27.3), Mareion further es Abraham from inheritance in Christ, by placing him in Hades as one who refused salvation, In the Apocalypse of Petey, Peter takes a detour from hell* and proceeds to the mount of the transfiguration, Abraham is one of the right- a heavenly plane de: full of fair trees: jopic Recen- iption resembles the de- cous fathers who are scribed asa gard and blessed! fruits” (Apoe. Peter, Eu sion, 16). This des scription of the garden of Eden (Gen 1:29; 28-0), In citing Matthew 8:11-12, relating to the paviarehal eschatological banquet, Justin em- phasizes the judgment® of the Jews who are no longer the children of God but are cast out into darkness (Justin Dial. Tryph. 76; see Light and Darkness) because of their unbelief. ‘The Gen- tiles who believe in Christ and who repent will receive the inheritance with the patriarchs (Justin Dial Pryph. 26.1; cf. 130.2). ‘Thus the Jews will be damned by God at the end of time, while the believing Gentiles. will share in the eschatological banquet with Abr ham, other patriarchs and the prophets, Siker states, “There is no clearer indication of the Jews’ status as a disinherited people ¢ Justin’sappeal to Matthew 8:11-12" (Siker, 183). 5.6. The Virtuous Abraham. Clement (see Clement of Rome) uses Abraham, who is often called “father,” as an example of faith and piety. Inf Clement 10 Abraham is called “t a” of God (ef. Clem. 1'7), and Clement also states that Abraham rendered obeclience to God by leaving bis country and Camily in order to in= nv that w 6 herit God’s promises. It was on account of his faith and hospitality that.a son was given to him in his old age and also that in exercising his obedience Abraham offered Isaac as a sicrifice to God (1 Clem. 31) Ser also ANCESTORS; CIRCUMCISION; HEBREWS Moses; PROMISE; STEPHEN, Binockarny, H.W. Attridge, Hebrews (Herm; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989); W. Baird, “Abraham in the New Testament: fradition and the New Identity,” Jnt 42. (1988) 367-79; N, L. Calvert, Barly fewish Traditions of Abraham: Impli cations for Pauline Texts (JSNVS; Shetfield: Shel field Academic Press, forthcoming); H. Con- zelmann, The Acts of the Apostles (Herm; Phi phia: Fortress, 1987); N. A. Dahl, Abraham in Luke-Aeis” in Studies in Latke-Aets, ed, L, E, Keek and J. L, Martyn (Nashville: Abingdon, 1966) 139-59; M. Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Bpistle of james (Herm; Philas delphia: Fortress, 1975); E. Ferguson, ed., Huey cloputia of Barly Christianity (New York: Garland, 1990); D. Harrington, *Pseudo-Philo: A New Translation and Introduction” in The Ole Testa- ment Pseudepixrapha, ed, J. H. Charlesworth (2 vols.; Gartlen City, N.¥.: Doubleday, 1983); W. L. Lane, Hebrews (2 vols.; WBC; Dallas: Word, 1991); I. H, Marshall, The Acts ofthe Apostles CENT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980); R. P. Martin, fames (WBC; Dallas: Word, 1988); J. B. Polhill, Acts: An Bregelical and Theological Exposé tion of Holy Scripture (NAC; Nashville; Broad- man, 1992); W. Schneemelcher, ed., New ‘Testament Apoerypla (2 vols.; Louisville, KY: West- minster/John Knox, 1989); J. 8. Siker, Disinher iting the Jews: Abraham in Barly Christian Controversy (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1991); J. Swetnam, fesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in Light of the Agedah (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981); A. L. Williams, fustin Martyr: The Dialogue with Drypho (New York: SPCR, 1980). N, GalvertKoyzis ABYSS. Sve Hit, Abyss, EP2RNAL PUNISHMENT ACTS OF ANDREW. See ArocryPHAL AND PScUDEPIGRAPRAL WRITINGS, ACTS OF JOHN. See ApocRyPiiAt. AND PSHUDE: PIGRAPHAL. WRITINGS. ACTS OF PETER, See APOCRYPHAL AND PSKUDE- PIGRAPHAL WRITINGS,Acts of the Apostles ACTS OF PETER AND THE TWELVE APOS- TLES. See APOCRYPHAL AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHAL WRITINGS, ACTS OF THE APOSTLES ‘The Acts of the Apostles is the fifth book in the NT canon,* located hetween collections of Gos- pels andl letters.* Although it is not the first Christian or NT document to have incorpo: rated an interest in narrative history, together with the Gospel of Luke itis the earliest example of Christian historiography. 1. The Genre of Ais 2, The Text of Acts 3, The Speeches in Acts 4. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts 5, The Theology and Purpose of Acts 1. The Genre of Acts. Particularly because of the content of Acts as well as the nature of the prefaces to Luke-Acts (Lk Isl; Acts Josephus Ag. Ap. Ll §§1-5;2.1 §§1-2), Acts haslong been understood asthe first example of Christian historiography. Following the influential work of H. J. Cadbury early in the twentieth century, study of Acts has until recently identified the work within the genre of ancient historiography. Questions about the historical veracity of the narrative of Acts, combined with ongoing reassessments of Acts within the context of the literature of Jew: ish and Greco-Roman antiquity, have opened to alively discussion the problem of the genre of Acts. Consequently Acts has beer located within cach of the three primary genres of the Roman world—historiography, the novel and. biogra phy. 1.1, Acts: Novel? Biography? Scientific Treatise? Ancient Historiography? Those scholars with sation of Acts as histo- Fiography have tended to maximize the formal discrepancies between the Lukan prefaces and those of Hellenistic historiography, contended that the preface to the Third Gospel does not intend the narrative of Acts and/or argued that because Acts is not reliable as a historical ac« countitshould not be seen asan example of the genre of ancient historiography, RI. Pervo, for example, maintains that Acts isan ancient historical novel written with the purpose of entertaining and edifying its read- rs, In making his case Pervo caricatures some of the more radical studies of Acts (e.g., doubts about the classifi Haenchen) as demonstrs “bumbling and incompetent” historian but a “brilliantand creative” writer. The problem with this characterization of Luke, according to Pervo, is that it wrongly asst intended as history. If one recognizes Acts as on, he observes, then the impasse is breached and Aets can be read for what it is rather than what it fails to achieve, Pervo cor- recily acknowledges the humor and wit of Acts butis unable to squeeze all of Acts into the mold demanded by esthetic delight, Even those for- mal features that Acts shares with the novel are not pe century treatise on How to Write History, Lucian advised historians to give the’ will interest and instruct them” ($53) Potentially more useful is the identification of (Luke-) Acts as “biography,” ographers, like historians, dealt with people who actually lived and events that actually ok ig that Luke was a mes that Acts is historical f liar to ancient novels; in his second- nce ancient bi However, the narrative of Acts is mani= place festly not focused on the performance of one person, so it can hardly be pressed into the bio, CH overcome this obstacle in his proposal that Luke-Aets is a biographical *succession narra- tive,” analogous to Diogenes Laertius’s Lives of the Philosophers (midthird century A.0.). ‘These biographies, he proposes, more or less conform toa threefold format: the life of the founder, a nity of his followers Talbert has tied to phieal genre, description of the com anda précis of the teachings* of the community in its contemporary form, Accordingly Luke's first volume, the Third Gospel, highlights the life of Jesus (founder), with Acts concentrating on the deeds and teachings of his followers, D, K, ized this appro: ing the existence of any such genre and noting the significant discrepancies beoween the re- spective functions of Laert (Aune, 78-79), Moreover, Luke signals his int est not so much in particular people as in “events” (Lk I:1-4); and the two parts of Luke's work are held together more basically by the overarching redemptive purpose (see Redemp- tion) of God than by the life* of one or more individuals, as would be expected in a biogra phy. That Luke has been influenced in his writ. ing by features of the genre of biography is clear (ef, Barr and Wentling), even if Acts cannot simply be identified asaspecimen of the ancient biographical genre. Aune has er h, question. i's Lives and Acts sActs of the Apostles A different approach has been followed by LG. A. Alexander, who draws attention to the formal differences between Luke's preface (Lk L:lel) and those of the Greek historiographers. Luke's preface seems too brief, consisting of only one sentence, as compared with the more elaborate openings of Greek historians; the uransition from Luke’s preface to the narrative i(sell'is surprisingly abrupt; unlike others, Luke docs not engage in explicit criticism of his predecessors; Luke's preface exhibits such a personal style, with its first-person. pronouns and dedication, that it has seemed inappropri- ate for inclusion in the genre of “dispassionate and timeless historiography”; and Luke’s open- ing offers no general moral reflections, com- mon among Greek historians. Such problems led Alexander to a reassessment of the literary map of Greek prefiice writing, with the result thatshe finds the closest analogues to Luke Ll and Acts 1:1 in the “scientific tadition"—that is, technical and professional writing on medi cine, mathematics, engineering, and the like Alexander proposes that Luke's narrative pres entation of Jesus and the early Christian move- ment is scientific in the sense that it is concerned to pass on the tradition of accumu lated teaching on this subject. ‘The affinities between Luke and the scien- tific tradition do not negate the identification of Luke 1:1-4 and Luke-Acts with historiogra- phy, however. First, that Luke-Acts does not match in every instance the formal features of Greco-Roman historiography presents no im: mediate problem, for the genre itself was easil manipulated, What is more, Luke has been i fluenced as well by OT and Jewish historiogra- phy, especially witht yespect to the use of historical sequences to shape a narrative theok ogy (see, e.g., Hall, Soards, Sterling), and Luke’s predecessors in Israelite amd Jewish his- toriography did not reflect on their aims and procedures within the context of the writing itself, Moreover, in describing his work as diegesis (“narvative,” Lk 1:1), Luke identifies his project as a long narrative account of many events, for which the chiel’ protoyypes were the early Greek histories of Herodotu and Thucydides (cf. Hermogenes Progymnas- mata 2; Lucian How to Write History $55). Pure ther, numerous components of Luke's work—symposia, travel narratives, letters, speeches—support a positive comparison of 8 Luke’sworkwith Greco-Roman. historiography. ‘A number of recent studies have strength- ened the earlier consensus that Acts isan exam- ple of the genre of ancient historiography. For example, viewing Acts in the context of deserip- tions of Hellenistic, Israelite and Hellenistic Jewish historiography, Aune concludes that “Luke was an eclectic Hellenistic Christian who arvated the carly history of Christianity from its origins in Judaism with Jesus of Nazareth through its emergence as a relatively inde- pendent religious movement open to all ethnic groups" (Aune, 188-89); this qualifies Luke-Acts as belonging to the genre of “general history. G.L Sterling, however, argues that Acts belongs toa type of history whose narratives “relate the story of a particular people by deliberately hel- lenizing their native traditions” (Sterling, 374), Other subgenres (c.g., historical monograph and political history) have also been proposed. Critical work in historiography has begun to underscore the apologetic role of all historiog- raphy (see 1,2 below), and this is the case with Acts, written to defend the unfolding of the divine purpose, from Israel* to the life and miinistry* of Jesus to the early church* with its inclusion of Gentile® believers as full partici- pants, and thus to legitimate the Christian moyement of which Luke himself was a part 1.2. Historiography and Historicism, In what sense, though, is it appropriate to refer to the narrative of Acts as history? What are we to make of the denial of Acts as historiography on the basis of its alleged duplicity in historical mat ters? Two points merit reflection. Fir tempt to present material in the generi¢ framework of historiography is no guarantee of historical veracity; choice of genre and quality of performance separate issues, Hence, even if more radical critics are correct in their indicuments of Acts as poor history, this would not be tantamount to excluding a generic iden- tification of Acts as historiography. At the same time it must be admitted that such indictments against Luke asa historian are no so firmly based as is sometimes claimed, (1) Although study of Acts as history continues to be plagued by a relative dearth of corroborative evidence, whether literary or physical, recent examination of that evidence by C. |. Hemer has encouraged a much more positive assessment of the historical reliability of Acts (sce also Hengel). (2) The sometimes spectacular ac- an ale counts of heali 12) have given s the whole as a However; in the ogy and in ligh biomedical para Western accoun such miriculou derstood as expr thology, super prescien tific w missed and have their sociohistori Second, Acts! ues in some quar ography on the | canons—thatis, 0 themselves been anachronistic wit ographer (see, eg Stock). The centr bate on Luke the | has had much Ie Luke-Acts than wit ceptions of the his the concomitant, 4 interpretation. Th Ties, that historical lishing that certai objectively repor eclipsed by a conce cal project in whic himself more at hen not, How cau the p ‘or What methodswi actually happened? nized that historiog It imposes significan of events to record a inherent efforts to p end and/or origin from validation to si How is the past bein cern with truth or ce in his narrative inter Identification of. raphy adds to the ey to the narrative, Al Luke's protessed inte anticipate « narrative given prominence, iss teleology are accord mined researeh is plActs of the Apostles counts of hi aling in Acts (e.g., Acts 5:15; 19:11 12) have given some scholars pause in accepting, the whole as an historically faithful account However, in the wake of postmodern epistemol- ogy and in light of increasing criticism of the biomedical paradigm for making sense of non- Western accounts of healing (see, e.g., Hahn), such miraculous phenomena—previously un: derstood as expressions of duplicity, mental ps thology, superstition, fantasy and/or a prescientific worldview—are not so easily clis- missed and have begun to be reexarnined for their sociohistorical significance. Second, Acts has vo often been and contin: uesin some quarters to be evaluated as histori- ography on the basis of modernist, positivistic canons—thatis, on the basis of criteria thathave themselves been anachronistic with reference to Luke as histori- ographer (see, e.g., Green 1996, Krieger, White, Siock). The central problem on which the de bate on Luke the historian has typically turned has had much less to do with the Luke-Acts than with modern, problematic con- ceptions of the historian’s enterprise and with the concomitant, absurd divorce of event from interpretation. ‘The view of the last two centu- ries, (hat historical inquiry is interested in estab- lishing that certain events took place and i objectively reporting those Facts, is being eclipsed by a conception of the historiographt- «le problematic and are of cal project in which Luke would have found himself more at home. ‘The primary question is not, How can the past be accurately captured? or What methods will allow the recovery of what actually happened? for it is increasingly recog. nized that historiography is always teleological Itimpoves significance on the past by its choice of events to record and to order as well as by ils inherent efforts to postulate for those eve end and/or origin, The emphasis thus shifts from validation to signification, so the issue is, Hoiw is the past being represented? Luke's con- cer with truth or certainty (see Lk 1:4) resides in his narrative interpretation of the past, Identification of Acts as ancient historiog- raphy adds to the expectations we may bring to th Alongside those raised by Luke's professed intentions (Lk I:L-4), we may anticipate a narrative in which recent history is, given prominence, issues of both causation and leleology are accorded privilege and deter mined research is placed in the service of persuasiveand engaging instruction, 2, The Text of Acts, Textual criticism of Acts presents.a special quan dary because of the existence of two primary and disparate textua! types, the Alexandrian (A B G81) and the Western (esp. Codex Bezac Canitabrigiensis [D]). The book of Acts in the Western tradition is almost 10 percent longer than the Alexandrian, and the character ofeach of these two textual types is distinctive. The essential question is, Whence the Western text? Is it the product of a studied recension of Acts? If so, can this effort be assigned a particular provenance? Or does the Western text be witness to an ongoing process of emendation? Is the Western text thoroughly secondary to the Alexandrian textual type? Can it be traced back to the hand of the Third Evangelist himself? Or does it display an amalgam of more or tess original and secondary readings that must be consilered (according to the eclectic method of textual criticism) on a case-by-case basis? Ip the history of research on the text of Acts, several related proposals have continued to sur face (see the surveys in Strange, 1-24; Barrett, 2-29) Asearlyas the kate seventeenth century itwas suggested that Luke was responsible for wo recensions of Acts and that this explains the existence of the two major text types. This view gained new momentum since the gnset of action criticism in the twentieth century a result of the detection of alleged Lukanisms in the Western versions. It is represented today by M-&, Boismard and A, Lamouille, who pos. tulate two authentically Lukan versions of Aets, of whieh Codex Bezae (D) and Codex Vaticanus (B) are the best, though not unsullied, repre sentatives; in their view the Western text type stems from the first edition of Acts while the Alexandrian reflects Luke’s later, revised per- spective, With this view one may compare the work of W. A. Strange; he believes that Acts w published posthumously by editors who left 160 ented by the two versions of Acis now rep! manuscript types. In spite of theories of this nature, most schol- ars continue to contend that the witnesses of the so-called Western tradition do not contain something approximating the original text of Aetsand to deny that with the Weste we have primary or secon: 1 tradition iceess to a revision 9Acts of the Apostles a dary, from the hand of the Third Evangelist. Agreeing with such earlier work as that of Mar tin Dibelius (84-92), they assume thatwhile che Western tex! has no claim to originality, it may «lings at some points, ins little agreement on ns contain superior Although there rem the nature of the original text of Acts, itre truc that most study of Acts continues to pro- ceed on the basis of the relative superiority of the Alexandrian text type. In some cases the Western text type is neglected, on the supposition that it represents a deliberate ancl sustained revi sion of the book of Acts; in others Westerntype readings are considered on a case-by-case basis, cen this unsettled state of affairs, we may hope that calls for the production of critical edition of the text of Acts will be heeded (Osburn). 3. The Speeches in Acts. Among the narrative elements that abound in Acts, the speeches are especially conspicuous, both in the narrative itself as well as on the landscape of the past century of scholarly work on Acts. Many of these are missionary speeches, delivered! to both Jewish and Gentile audiences. ‘These would include such important sermons as those delivered by Peter at Pentecost (Acts 214-40) and by Paul at Pisidian Antioeh* (Acts 18:16-41); these speeches play programmatic roles within their narrative cotexts. This cate- gory of speeches, the missionary sermons, has been at the center of scholarly debate: How accurately has Luke reproduced early Christian missionary discourse? Other speeches have i portant roles within the cluding Stephen's defense speech to the Jerusalem council (Acts 7-253), Paul's farewell taclress to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:18 Paul's forensicaddresses before Roman officials (eg, Acts 24:10-21; 26:2-28) , addresses by Peter and James at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:7- 11, 13.21), and so on, Of approximately 1,000 verses in Acts, 365 are found in majorand minor speeches and dialogues (Soards, 1), with direct address responsible for more than half of the book 3.1, The Debate over Sources and Tradition, The agenda for the modern study of the speeches in Acts was set by the work of Dibelits, first published in 1949 (ET 1956), He sought 10 locate the speeches of Acts within the matrix of ancient historiography, where, he insisted, the speech was “the natural complement of the 10 deed” (Dibelius, 139). Accordingly the chief question was not the transcription ofa partic Jar address but the aim of a speech in the ha of the historiographer—that is, within the his- torical writing as a whole, A speech might im- part to the reader insight into the total situation of the narrative, interpretive insight into the historical moment, insight into the character of aspeaker, and/or insightinto general ideas that might explain situation, Additionally a speech mightadvance the action of the account (Dibe- lius, 139-40), But the inclusion of speeches in historical writing would not constitute any claim, for the historicity of the address itself, In his examination of the speeches in Acts, Dibelius was concerned with its function in the book as awhole. With the hegemony of diachronic ap- proaches to NT study in general, subsequent stucly of the speeches of Acts remembered Dibe- lius mostly for his view that the speeches were Lukan compositions (see esp. Haenchen), Even though practically no one would claim that the addresses in Acts are verbatim representations of what was said, itis with reference to just such categories that the debate on their historicity has typically been framed. On the basis of what have now been shown to be largely specious arguments, scholars have referred to consis: tency of language and style from speech to specch anid from indirect to direct discourse, and consistency of content from speech to speech, in order to deny their historicity. Viewed primarily as a traditio-historical problem, the speeches of Acts have been stud- ied for their historicity. With few exceptions .. Bruce 1942), such examinations have led. to largely negative conclusions, even if on mat- ters of detail the handprint. of apostolic tradi- tion might be discerned here and there (e.g. Acts 13:38-895 20:28, where Pauline-type catego~ ies are found). Most scholars have concluded that the speeches in Acts are Lutkan in compo- sition, typically with lide if any traditional basis, ud that they serve primatily as instruments of discourse from the author of Acts to his audi- ence (see esp. Wilckens). Until recently scholarship has not taken as seriously as it might that by “composition” Dibe ius pointed not only to “Lukan invention” but also and fundamentally to Lukan artistry. With the rise of interest in narrative” and rhetorical ms, however, some interpreters have be- ds. gun largely to and history an elements of ea portend the in action in the 1 1984, Tannehil An importa ing in ancient has surfaced ay impasse of these Gempf insists t vant to ancient | rate or inaecura speech? thus pre ora continuum fulness tw an al writers sought to tween artistic ar This is because sy tive representatic transcript of wha sion but to docu Historiographers cerned, therefor that would coher terms of language arydimension) an aS anachronistic o was known of the Was attributed (the In other words, sus in the discussio the speeches of Act preclude historical Lukan styleand the does not lead nece these speeches are spect to historical » Not narrowly define stead the writer wc keeping with what torical data available 3.2. The Rote of th 3.2.1. A Unified W demonstrated, one ¢ missionary speeches. including a connect and the speech; chri ported with scriptura tion*; and often the i by the audience or ‘Taken as a whole the s ers of Jesus evidenceActs of the Apostles gun largely to disregard questions of tradition and history andl to examine how the setting and elements of each speech are deployed so as to portend the importance of each speech as an action in the unfolding narrative (see Neyrey 1984, Tannchill 1991, Soards). An important reexamination of speech writ- ing in ancient historiography by C. H, Gempf has surfaced a via media that moves beyond the impasse of these conflicting paradigms of study. Gempf insists that the principal question rele- vanit (0 ancient historiography is not, Is it accu- rate or inaccurate in its representation of this speech? thus producing a false eithenor choice or a continuum concerned primarily with faith- fulness 10 an alleged source, Instead ancient writers sought to achieve a twofold balance be» tween artistic and historical appropriateness, ‘This is because speeches are included in narra- tive representations of history not to provide a transcript of what was spoken on a given oce sion but to document the speech event itself, Historiographers (like Luke) would be con- cerned, therefore, with composing speech that would cohere with the work as a whole in terms of language, style and content (the lite ary dimension) and that would not be regarded as anachronistic or out of charaeter with what was known of the person lo whom the speech was attributed (the socio-historical dimension), In other words, contra the modern conse sus in the discussion on tradition and sources in the speeches of Acts, literary aspirations do not preclude historical value, and the presence of Lukan style and theology in the speeches of Acts does not lead necessarily to the inference that these speeches are Lukan in origin, With re spect to historical appropriateness the issue is not narrowly defined in terms of accu stead the writer would compose a speech in keeping with what could be known of the his: torical data available to him 3.2, The Role of the Speeches. 3.2.1. A Unified Worldview: As has often been demonstrated, one can discern a pattern in the missionary speeches of Acis: appeal for hearing, neluding a connection between the situation and the speech; christological* kerygma sup- ported with scriptural proof; the offer of salva tion*; and often the interruption of the sermon by the audience or by the narrator himself. Taken as.awhole the speeches in Acts by follow: ers of Jesus evidence a kerygma that is ove whelmingly christocentrie but that also features a medley of reoccurring motifs, including the trality of Jesus’ tion and/or ascension*), together with its salvific effect; repentance and/or lorgiveness* of sing; the u of salvation; the Holy s and, frequently through scriptural in- terpretation, the assurance* that the message of this salvation is the 1 will As we would expect, each of these motifs is integral to Luke's theology (see § below), but this does not render the speeches in Acts as simply a collective deposit of Lukan thought Where comparative material is available, close examination will indicate how the speeches of Acts have struggled to hold in tension the some- limes competing aims of speech writing in his toriography, literary and so faithfulness. These instances of repetition within the narrative of Acts demonstrate more particularly Luke's concern to advanee through these speeches a distinet (though not at all points distinctive) view of God's purpose. This perspective is then propagated by each of the major figures who serve as witnesses to redemp> don in Act 3.2.2. Performutive Uiterances, Tt would not be appropriate in every case to catalog these ad- dresses as commentary, even if, as deliberate pausesin the action, they possessan interpretive function, Instead the speeches often have per- formative roles; they advance the action of the narrative as they provide the logic and impetus for further developments in the realization of the narrative aim of Luke-Acts. The speeches of Stephen and Peter in Acts 7:2-58 and Acts 10:34 43 (and Acts 11:5-17), for example, appear at crucial junctures, pushing the narrative beyond Jerusalem” and Judea to Samaria and to “the endl of the earth” (Acts 1:8). 3.2.3. “Revealed History.” Paul's sermon at Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:16-41) exemplifies a common concern of the speeches in Acts to locate historical events in an interpretive web by splicing together in one narrative thread the past, presentand future of God's salvitic activity, In this perspective the meaning of historical data is not self-evident but must be interpreted, and legitimate interpretation is a product of ine revelation* (cf. Hall). Paul’s speech moves deliberately and naturally from divine vity in the OT to the work of John and Jesus exaltation (ie,, resurrec- piri ifestation of the itActs of the Apostles to the need for present response, thus providing christological interpretations of the Scriptures and of history, 3.2.4. Acls ay Wilness, Phe sheer amount of the narrative given over to speeches when com pared with other exemplars of ancient histor ography (or biography or novel) is suggestive of another narrative role for the speeches in Acts, ned with the fact that in Acts speeches are typically given by witnesses or for or against the witness, this suggests that via the speeches Luke himself is giving witness, relating “all that God had done with them" (Acts 14:27). “In Luke-Acts, speeches are an essential feature of the action itself, which is the spread of the word of God” (Aune, 125), Com ‘The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, 4.4. Lukeo-Acts, or Lulee and Acts. bury fixed the hyphen between Luke and Acts arly in the twentieth century, the relationship between these two books has been more as sumed than explored. The canonical separa tion of the two notwithstanding, until recently most scholars have assumed that the Third Gos- peland Acts shared the same author, genre and a. common theological perspective and that the rative of Acts was writien as the calculated continuation of the narrative of the Gospel. uch assumptions haye been called into ques. 1 by M. C, Parsons and Pervo (1993), among others, Although they agree that Luke and Acts share authorship, they question whether these two books belong to the same genre, are theo- logically harmonious and together embody one continuous narrative. ‘The issues raised by Parsons and Pervo are important if only because their central observa- tion is correct: the unity of Luke-Acts has been more assumed than justified and explored. But their arguments are difficult to sustain, Because scholarship has not reached a cone sensuson the generic identification of Lukeand Acts, Parsonsand Pervo conclude that Lukeand Acisdo not share unity at the level of genre. This discussion begs important questions: Given the fluidity of generic forms in antiquity, why must one work for the high level of precision on which this rejection of generic unity depends? With respect to the Third Gospel, why must we ume Luke worked with constraints related to an evolving Gospel genre? Could Luke not be setting out to do something for which previous ince Cad- 12 models or forms proved inadequate? And the possible analogues for serial volumes using mul- tiple genres posed by the authors (e.g., l-4 King doms and 1-2 Maccabees) are hardly material, given our understanding of the composition and unity of those books. Further, Parsons and Pervo deny narrative unity by positing the potential identification of two different (textually constructed) narrators, one for Luke, the other for Acts—this in spite of the fact that the application of narcatology to even one of these books surfaces multiple nar rutorsand levels of narration (Kurz). Nor do the authors deal constructively with the possible claim of the narrator of Luke 1:1-4 to have been. of the circle of those (“us") among whom of) these events “have been fulfilled” (ef. the “we passages” in Acts, 4.5 below). Nor do they raise the possibility that Latke and Acts share a gle narrative purpose and that im this lies their essential narrative unity. Along more constructive lines itis important to note that the division of Luke-Aets into two volumes does not signify that one account had ended and a new one begun or drat volume 2 would turn toa different subject matter. Rather, Ws a matter of physical expediency ancient authors divided their lengthy works into “books,” each of which fit on one papyrus roll. The 1 um length of a papyrus roll ex- tended to thirtyfive feet, and Luke’s two vol- umes, the tro longest books in the NT, would have each required a full papyrus roll. Moreover, in size the two are roughly equiva: lent—the Gospel with about 19,400 words, Acts with approximately 18,400 words—so that they would have required papyrus rolls of about the same length, Thus the division between Luke and Acts conformed to the desire of contempo- ry writers to keep the size of their books symmetrical (cf, Diodorus 1.29.0; 141.10; Josephus Ag: Ap. 1.35 $320). In other ways too the plan of Luke and Acts suggests a purposeful proportionality. Both narratives begin in Jerue salem; the Gospel ends and Acts begins with commission narratives associated with reports of Jesus’ ascension; the time span covered by cach volume is approximately thirty years; Luke's narration of Jesus’ last days in Jerusalem (Lk 19:28—24:53) and of Paul's arrest, trials and arrival in Rome (Acts 21:27—28:31) each occupy 25 percent of theirrespective books; and Luke has regularly developed parallels between Jesus in the Gos the Acts of the Further, tho consider this qu 1:1-4 serves as Luke's work, tw suiggeestedl by the and recapitulate Josephus's Agair notonly refers to as the subject of began to do and. summary of the‘ the characteristic separable connec the term hegan, thi ation of the missioy is not disappointe his name" fea. 4 22:16) —a name* presence of Jesus Acts 3:6, 16; 4.7, | 10:43; 16:18). ‘The of the Apostles ng (see Augustine De. phrase “the event among us” (Lk 1:1. Jesus and to the act The Gospel of Li ofthe Apostles, and tive of the Acts, wit narrative of God's 1 gun with the births and at the same tim cance of the Jesus 5 and articulated fore! thus builds on the Luke, de monistrating the church to the Jes: significance of Jesus The narrative unit tant implications fo: work. Most signitican derstanding of Luke thus our understand audience he addresse dence, both the Gosp Critical chat we unders Gospel anticipate asp only (finally) in Acts. Simeon realizes that i tion has come that wi light for revelation wActs of the Apostles Jesus in the Gospel of Luke and bis disciples in the Acts of the Apostles, Further, though Parsons and Pervo do not consider this question in their 1998 work, Luke 1:14 serves as a prologue for the whole of Lake's work, two volumes, Luke-Aets. suggested by the parallel between the primary and reeapitulutory prefaces in Luke-Acts and Josephnus's Against Apion, In addition Acts 1:1 not only refers toa “first book” hutalso denotes as the subject of that first book “all that Jesus began to do and to teach.” This isa transparent summary of the Third Gospel, which continues the characteristic Lukan. emphasis on the in- separable connection of word and deed, With the term began, this summary suggestsa continu: ation of the mission of Jesus, an expectation that isnot disappointed, for Jesus’ followers “eall on his name” (c.g., Acts 2:21; 921; 15:17; 18: 22:16)—a name” that signifies the comtinuing presence of Jesus to bring wholeness oflife (c.., ‘Acts 86, 165; 4:7, 10, 12, 17, 30; 8:19; 9:15, 34 10:43; 16:18). The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles narrate one continuous story (see Augustine Dy Cons, 4.8), therefore, and the phrase “the events that have been fulfilled among us” (Lk L:1-4) refers both to the story of Jesus and to the activity of the early church, ‘The Gospel of Luke thus anticipates the Acts ofthe Apostles, and italso authorizes the narra- tive of the Acts, with Acts both continuing the narrative of God's mighty acts of salvation be: gun with the births of John and Jesus (Lk 1—2) and at the sai ft cance of the Jesus story might be worked out and articulated for changing times (Korn). Acts thus builds on the foundation established in Luke, demonstvating. th Ue church to the Jesus eventby interpreting the significance of Jesus for a new day ‘The narrative unity of Luke tant implications for our rea work. Most significantly it requi derstanding of Luke's purpose in writing and thus our understanding of the need(s) and audience he addressed account for all the evie dence, both the Gospel and Acts. Similarly it is critical that we understancl that inciclents in the Gospel anticipate aspects of the story narrated only (finally) in Acts, Notably, in Luke 2:25-35, Simeon realizes that in this child Jesus a salva- tion has come that will he experienced as “a light for revelation to the Gentiles” (Lk 2:32), This is e time showing how the ongoing relation of Acts has impor ing of Luke's our une st ministry as recorded in the Gos ‘sus interacts only but during ti pel of Luke non-Jews. One must wait for Acts to see how the Gentile mission is begun, legitimated and takes 1 shape at the behest of God and as guicled and empowered by the Holy Spirit. The list chapter of the Gospel closes off significant as- peets of the story's plot, but there is a more overarching intentatwork, the redemptive pur pose of God for all people, Seen against this purpose, the Gospel of Luke is incomplete in itself, for it opens up possibilities in the narra. tive cycle that go unrealized i materialize in the Acts of the Apostles. 4.2, Lathe, Acts and the New Testament Canon, The unity of Luke-Acts—two volun story—easily escapes the modern reader in large part due to the canonical placement of these two books in the NT. Although the Gospel and Acts may have been completed and made available to the wider public separately, in the second century A, the Gospel of Luke eame to be located with the other Gospels so as to form the fourfold Gospel. Not surprisingly, then, Luke's first volume has come to be thought of primarily as a Gospel, It is worth refleeting on the probability that in Lake's day no such Titer ary form existed, however, so that we would be amiss to think either that Luke set out to write a Gospel or that his readership would have understood his work within tis category, Luke narratives,” not as rely with the Gospel but refers to his predecessors as “Gospels,” and there is no a priori reason to imagine that Luke's purpose was to write a story of Jesus io which he later appended an account Rather, the narrative he wished to relate developed naturally and pur- posefully from the story of Jesus’ earthly minis- try Lo that of the continuation of Jesus’ mission through the early church, Nevertheless, according to the logic of the canonical placement of Acts, I ume rests in an interpretive relationship with the Pauline letters. In fact early lists of NT books usually situated Aets sometimes before, some: fimes after the Pauline corpus, Presumably as a bridge from the story of Jesus to the ministry of Paul, Acts was eventually located in its present position bewveen the Gospels and the letters The consequence of its location in the canon is that Acts came to provide a sequential, bio- graphical and missionary framework within which to fit the Pauline letters—a framework ‘of the early church, e's second vol BAcis of the Apostles: ee that is presumed in most biblical study even though critical scholarship has surfaced impor- tant Lensions between the portraits of Paul and his mission available to us in Acts and in his letters 4.3, LukeActs: One Narrative Aim. A conch sion for the unity of Luke-Acts has as its imme- diate consequence the rejection of any proposed purpose for Luke's writing that does not account for the evidence of both volumes. Although the primary purpose of Acts may have its corollary, for example, se of Paul (as has been argued), this formulation does not grapple fully with the whole of Luke-Acts. A conclusion for the narrative unity of Luke-Acts would presuppose that the whole could be ex mined as the unfolding of one continuous narrative eyele moving from anticipation to nar- rative possibilities to probabilities to aetualities to consequences and serving one primary nar- rative If we view Luke-Acts on the large canvas of narrative analysis, it is possible to sce in its entirety one narrative aim unfolding ina simple tive eycle, In it we see the working out of ‘one aim: God's purpose to bring salvation in all of its fullness to all (Green 1994, 62-68), This aim is anticipated by the angelic’ and pro- phetict voices that speak on God's behalf (Lk 252), It is made possible by the birth and growth of Join and Jesus in households that honor God, According to the Lakan birth nar- tative, though, this is not an aim that will be reached easily or without opposition, Notall will respond favorably to God's agent of salvation, Jesus, resulting in antagonism, division and con- flict. The realization of God's aim is made prob: able through the preparatory mission of John and the life, death and exaltation of Jesus, with its concomitant commissioning and promised einpowering of Jesus’ followers to extend the message 10 all people (Lk 3—Acts 1), Jesus himself prepares the way for this tmiversal mis sion by systematically dissolving the barriers that predetermine and have as (heir consequence division between ethnic groups, men and women, adults and children, rich and poor, righteous and sinner, and so on, Ln his mninistry even conflict is understood within the bounds of God's salvific purpose, Jesus’ death as a divine necessity, his exaltation a vindication of his mninistry and pow act of God naking possible the extension of salvation to Jew and Gentile alike, 1 de! im. par I4 hhe subsequent story in Acts consists of a narration of the realization of God's purpose, particularly in Aets 2-15, as the Christian i sion is directed by God to take the necessary steps to achieve a community of God’s people composed of Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles ‘The results of this narrative aim (Acts 1628) highlight more and more Jewish antagonism to the Christian movement, and the church ap- pears more and more to be Gentile in makeup. ‘This too is God's purpose, according to the narrator, speaking above alll through his spokes- person Paul (and through Paul, the Scriptures), even if efforts among the Jewish people atinter- preting Moses* and the prophets as showing the Messiah is Jesus should continue. 4A. Acts 1:8 and the Outline of the Book of Acts ‘The story related in Acts begins in | and ends in Rome, with the plan of the book thus giving form to the centrifugal shape of the mission it recounts, [t would not be unusual for a Hellenistic writer of sequential books to pro- vide in a second or subsequent book a preface that inchides a summary of the former and outline of the present book. Many readers of Acis have found in Jesus’ words in Acts 1:8— “Rather, you will receive power when the Holy pirit comes upon you, and you will be my wimessesin Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth"—a summary out line of Acts, Many who see an outline of the book in Acts 1:8 further identify “the end of the earth” as Rome, Although Jesus! words may be taken as the outline of Acts, albei vi fieation of Rome as “the taken, ial sense, this ice end of the earth” is almost certainly mi ‘Acts 1:8 relates Jesus’ response to the dise ples’ quest estoration of the king- dom® to Israel. Jesus does not replace a parochial, nationalistic hope* for the restora- tion of Israel's dominion with a universal mis sion as much as he sets the future of Israel within, the now more widely defined plan of God. Jesus’ references toa mission in Jerusalem, Jud “the land of the Jews"—cf, Lk 4:44; Acts 1 see Land) and Samaria represent significant pro- gress in this direction and portend the develop- ment of the mission in Aets 2—8 Beyond Samaria the Spiritendowed mission was to continue to “the end of the earth.” Vari- ous options have been championed for making sense of the phrase iia eschatou tes ges. Some regard it as a geographical location: Ethiopia, about th an th ph in is me for res ope vari cont citar end sens allpActs of the Apostles Spain, Rome, or even the “Land [of Israel] Others find in it a more symbolic reference to a universal mission including the Gentiles— that is, a mission to the whole world." That Luke must have tad in view in Acts 1:8 a purely geographical connotation (as is often emphasized) can hardly be sustained, for space isnever measured in purely geographical terms but is always imbued with symbolic power, Ge. ography—and especially such geo; markers as “Judea” and “Samaria’—is not a “naively given container” but rather a social production that both reflects and configures being in the world, Note, for example, the iden- lification of “ as the location of the temple* and abode of God in Jewish and Lukan perspective and the religious sensibilities that would have been transgressed by this juxtaposi- tion of “Judea” (land of the Jews) and “Samaria” (land of the Samaritans; ef, Lk 10:30-37; 17:1 1- 19). Nor is it necessary to restrict the referent of this phrase to a location within the narrative of Acts; other possibilities generated within the narrative are left unfulfilled at its close (other examples of external protepsis inclucle Paul's execution and Jesus’ Parousia) Nor does Luke ever identify Rome as the mission's finial point; Rome may serve as not ing more than a new point of departure for the mission, like Jerusalem and Antioch earlier in the story. Moreover, even in Acts “witnesses prececle Paul to Rome, so that Acts 27-28 beings Paul, not the gospel, to Rome, Although in the literature of Greco-Roman anliquily the meaning of the phrase *the end of the carth" was used to refer to Spain, Ethiopia, nd so on, one must inquire into how this phrase finetions in this cotext, At this juncture in Acts, the meaning of “the end of the earth is polysemous—th most nothing by way of interpretive guideli for identifying the referent of this phrase. As a result one may read through the narrative in- quiring at multiple poinis, Is this *the end"? (And if so, will God’s dominion now be real: ince?) Greck usage elsewhere allows for such openendediness (cf. Strabo Geog.). But these various interpretive possibilities are narrowed considerably upon reading Acts 13:47, with its citation of Isaiah 49:6, where the phrase “the end of the earth” is again found but with the sense more transparent. all peoples," “across all boundaries, is, we have been given ab: “everywhere,” “among Luke's evi- nic eschatologi- e provides corroborative evidence for the conclusion that the narrative ncourages an identification of “the ond of the earth” with a mission to all peoples, Jew and Gentile, This underscores the redemptive- torical continuity between this text and its Isaianiec pre-text, (alvo Ts 8:9; 45:29; 48:20; 62:1 ef, Deut 28:49; Ps 134:6-7; Jer 10:12; 14:19; 1 Mace 8:9). In only a very limited sense might one take Acts 1:8 as an outline of Ac nificant is the way it identifies God's aim with the narrative (anc, one may presume, for the storyas it extends beyond the narrative of Acts) As it clarifies God's purpose, it also gives us a meastire by which to ascertain what persons within the narrative have oriented themselves fullyaroumd serving God's design. That is, those who obey the missionary program of Acts 1:8. are shown to be operating under the guidance and_power* of the Spirit and thus followin God's plan; they are shown to be witnesses. The importa if iL is not regarded as framing the outline of Acts, for its statement of God's aim within the narrative has certainly left its imprint on the ve itself, One can easily fol jugal shape of the mission, though sometimes the progression of the mission is Less geographical and Jesus’ witnesses return to Jerusalem in order 10 out further the theological rationale for a mission that includes those “at the end of the earth” (Aels 11-18; 15; 21:1—26:32). More- over, our identification of “the end of the earth asa reference to the universal scope and not the geographical goal of the mission suggests that the story of Acts does not end with the close of the narrative in Acts 28:31, Rather, the chalk Jenge to mission reaches beyond the narrative to Luke's subsequent readers, 4.5. The Author and the Narrator of Acts. Ux- amining Acts as a narrative raises the question of the voice through whom the story is told— that is, the identity of the narrator. An author might choose to adopt some yoice other than his or her own, and in narrative theory narra tors differ in how much they choose to tell, the degree of their reliability and how willing they are to intrude into the narrative itself, Narrative crities agree that the narrators of the Gospels dent dependence on the Is cal* vision® elsewher fuch more sig- nuthentic cof Acts 1:8isnotdiminished low the cent ore theological, as when wo isActs of the Apostles Es and Acts are knowledgeable and are willing to alert their audiences to realities other than those on the surface of recounted evenis—eyg., the motivations of characters within the story Acts 24:27; 25:3); that they are so reliable thal their points of view are consistent with those expressed by God and God’sagents within the narratives; and that they are generally unob- trusive in telling their stories. At the same time the narralor of Aeis might on occasion provide an explanatory comment to his reader (e4g., Acts 9235 [Tabitha’s name in Greek is Dorcas]; 129 [Peter's inner thoughts}), and in Acts 16:10-17; 20:51 18; 27:1—28:16 (ie, in the “we” passages) he steps into the story asa character. ‘Today, when many scholars speak of “Larke” with reference to the hand behind Luke- Acts, they have reference (0 Luke as narrator, often without any necessary inference regard. ing the identification of the actual author of this work, Luke-Acts, like the Gospels of Matthew, Mar. and John, are anonymous documents (though see John 21:24-25), and the we passages do nothing at a literary level to alter this state of affairs. ‘That is, even. when involved in first-pe son narration, the narrator of Acts identifies himself not as an individual with a name bat as one of a group. He is present, sometimes as a participant, other times as an observer, at some events, but his focus is not his individual iden= tity; rather, the “we” of his narration contributes lo the vividness of his account and invites his to active partic tive, That first-person narration happens in only selected portions of the account underscores that the narrator makes no claim to being @ constant companion of Paul and his circle. It also suggests, however, that first-person 1 ion is more than a literary deviee calculated to enliven the narrative. Long before the onset of narrative or this last set of observations led readers of Acts to am identification of the author of Acts as Luke, Paul’s fellow worker (Philem 24) and sometime companion, a physician (Gol 4:11, 14; 2 Tim 4:11). Eusebius, for example, identifies the author of Acts as Luke, an Antiochene, physician and frequent companion of Paul (usebius Hist, Reel. 3.4.1), ado Jerome (Vir 7) and many others (see Barrett, 80-48; Fitzmyer, 1-26). In the second century, Irenaet! pation in audience icism identified 16 Luke, the companion of Paul, as the author of Acts, though he also goes further, to speak of the relationship between Luke and Paul as separable” (Hade 3.1.1, 4), This latter inference lies behind critical rejection of Luke as the author of Acts since, it is alleged, the author of Acts has distorted the message of Paul and. so could not have been his regular companion But the inseparability of Luke and Paul is nota necessary inference from Acts; indeed, itis cou tradicted by Acts, wherein we are informed r peatedly that the narrator was partof'a company whose traveling agenda overlapped with that of Paul but that did not join Paul’s entourage en for lengthy peri- regularly, permanently or ods of time, When itis further remembered that the po: trait of Paul available to us via his letters is itself tendentious, shaped by sometimes tensior filled relations with his audiences; that discus sions of the incongruity between the Paul of Acts and the Paul of the Pauline correspon- dence have sometimes suffered from critical hyperbole; that in any case the narrator of Acts is more concerned with telling the story of the realization of God’s salvific aim than with devel- oping personalities, and that characters within Acts are more important forwhat they add to that story than with reference to their own stories (cf, pwartz), then the critical concerns that have led to the denial of the identity of Luke as the author of Acis dissipate considerably. Nevertheless, itis worth inquiring into what ist stake in the identification of the real author of Acts, Thal, for example, C. K. Barrett can ‘engage in a critical reading of Aets without first deciding the issue of authorship issurely sugges: tive. This is all the more true when itis recalled that Luke makes no apparent attempt to assert himself into the narrative in order to serve concerns of historical veracity, Final resolution of the question of authorship would not table questions of historical accuracy, and, aswe know almost nothing of the background of the histor cal Luke, our insisting that he is responsible for Acts acids almos ng 10 our understanding of his narrative, As with the canonical Gospels, then, so with Acts: our reading proceeds best on the basis of what we are able to discern about its narrato: from within ( 5, The Theology and Purpose of Acts, Numerous proposals for the purpose of Acts mi tia cal wit na cen Pau the imn suc rave mig] Acts and of AC tion rative God confi nean, isnot God's tan n contr pose 1 been t the fae interpy tive puhave been defended in recent scholarship, in- cluding the following; 1. Acts is a defense of the Christian church to Rome (c.g., Bruce) 2, Acts isa defense of Rome to the Christian church (Walaskay) 8. Acts is an apology for Paul who have sided with againstPaul's notion that Christianity is the truc successor to Judaism’ (see Mattill and Matill). 4, Acts is. a work of edification designed to provide an eschatological corrective for a church in crisis (Conzelmann). 5. Acts is written to reassure believers str ging with the reliability of the kerygma—either with regard (o its truth and relevance (e.g., van Unnik) or with respect to its firm foundation in the story of God's people (e.g., Macldox) 6, Acts was it the Christian movement in its attempts to legitimate itself over against Judaism (Esler). 7. Acts is written to encourage among Chris tians a fundamental allegiance to Jesus th: aalled for @ basic social and political stance within the empire (Cassidy) In light of our earlier comments on the narrative unity of Luke-Acts, some of thi be excluded from the outset—namely, those centering on aims particular to Acts and/or Paul (i., 1+3)—sinee these do not account for the whole of the Lukan narrative, This is not immediately to deny that Luke may have had such concerns, however, for the haye been motivated by multiple aims thi might notlaya claim on the narrative as awhole. Our understanding of the aim of (Luke-) Acts flows from our understanding of its genre and narrative aim, We have seen that the genre of Acts suggests Luke’s concern with legit tion and apologetic. Our discussion of the na rative aim of Aets highlighted the centrality of God's purpose to bring salvation to all, In the conflicted world of the firstcentury Meditert nean, not least within the larger Jewish world, it isnot difficult to sce how this understanding of God's purpose and its embodimentin the Chris- tian movement would have been the source of controversy and uncertainty, We may then pro pose that the purpose of Latk been to strengthen the Christian movement in the face of opposition by ensuring them in their interpretation and experience of the redemp. tive purpose of God andl by calling them to against Judaiz non-Christian Jews tended to a can Evangelist may continued faithfulness and witness in God's salvific project. The purpose of Luke-Acts would thus be primarily eeclesiological, centered on the invitation to participate in God’s project. (Our understanding of the aim of (Luke-) Acts must also account for its primary theological emphases, Recent scholarship has repeatedly identified salvation as the primary theme of Luke-Acts, theme being understood as that which unifies other textual elements within the narrative. In order to make sense of the theme of salvation and to show the degree to which it is integrated into the overall purpose of strengthening the chureh (as we have just de scribed), we must develop it within what can only be an outline of key theological motifs, 5.1. God's Purpose. The purpose or plan of God is of signal importance for Acts, and its presence behind and in the narrative is paraded ina variety of ways. This motif is present espe- cially through a constellation of terms expres: sive of God's design (¢.g., boule/boulomai [purpose /1o purpose” —Acis 2:23; 4:28; 13:36; 20:27], dei [“itis necessary’—Acts 1:16, 21; 3:21; 4:15 5:29; 9:16; 14:22; 16:805 17:3; 19:21; 20:34 27:24, 26], horiza [to determine"—Aeis 2:23; 10:42 17:26, 31]); through angels, visions and prophecies; through instances of divine choreography of events; through the employ- ment of the Scriptures of Israel; and through the activity of the Holy 8 This pronounced emphasison the divine will is presentin Acts to certify that the direction of the Christian mission is leg eclipse human decision making and involve- mentin the mission. Indeed, the dramatie q\ ity of the narrative is noticeably enhanced by the conflict engendered as some people choose to oppose the divine aim. God does people into serving his will, but ni God's plan uhimately be derailed by opposition toil. The communication of his purpose comes as an invitation for people to align themselves with that. purpose; some may refuse to do so, but others (and the invitation is (o all) will embrace his will, receive the gift of salvation and join in his redemptive activity (see further Squires; Green, 1995, 22-49). 5.1.1. The Divine Purpose, Although God never enters the narrative of Acts ag a.character, his presence is everywhere apparent through the activity of the Holy Spirit (see 5.1.3 below) angels and through visions and prophecies. 17Acts of the Apostles —— Through these agents and agencies, God both choreographs human encounters and events and verifies that the mission to the Gentiles is consonant with his will Two ease studies in divine choreography (Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch, Peter and ny the narration of the be- ginnings of the mission to the Gentiles. Th is no socio-historical or narratological reason to suspect that the Ethiopian eunuch is anything but a Gentile (Acts 8:26-10). Philip's" encor ter with him on the read to Gaza comes at the intersection of (1) the Ethiopian’s having made pilgrimage, like many Gentiles in the ancient Mediterranean, to worship in Jerusalem; (2) his reading of a text (Is 5 lights the humility of the fsiianic servant and so declares the solidarity of Yahweh's servant with the eunuch in his own humble status (even though he went to worship* in Jerusalem, as a eunuch he would have been exeluded from the Lord's assembly; cf. Deut 23:1; ly 56:3-5); (8) Philip's being directed by an angel of the Lord to travel on the same road, then instructed by the Spirit to join the entourage of the Ethiopian court ollicial; (5) his being able to serve as interpreter of the Scriptures. Following the eunuch’s bap. tism, * Philip is snatched away by the Spirit of the Lord; this divine encounter has reached its con- clusion, Philip's r ppointment with the eunuch may have initiated the Gentile mission, but this in- novation is unknown to anyone within the nai + Philip does not report what has happened to Jerusalem, and presumably the eunuch journeys home. Hence the encounter hetween Peter and Cornelius (Acts 10;1— 11:18) initiates the Gentile mission in its own way, particularly since in this case the believers Jerusalem are included in the account, As ip, 80 With Peter, this novelly comes at God's behest, through the careful staging of visionary and angelic messages to communicate the divine purpose (Acts 10:1-16). In both cases, but more explicitly in the latter, the importance of human volition is not diminished, Cornelius and Peter have sepa divine directives, neither of which js complete in itself: According to this choreography, both persons must obey what disclosure they have received in order to understand more fully what God is working to accomplish in their encoun- ter, As if to underscore again that the Gentile 18 mission is God's doing, when they do follow through on God's purpose, the Holy Spirit breaks imto their gathering, falling upon “all who heard the word” (Acts 10:44). This work of the autonomous Spirit is taken as the proof that the Gentile mission, together with full fellow- ship* between Jewish and Gentile believers, was God's purpose (Acts 11:17-18), Angels are active elsewhere too (cf, Acts 5:19, 21; 12:7-11, 23; 18:9-20; 27:28-24), indicating the ongoing direction and providential care of God, as do visions (Acts 10:10-16; 16:6-10; 22:17- 21), 5.1.2. The Scriptures of Israel By the Scriptures of Isracl, we mean the Septuagint, and espe- cially Deuteronomy, the Psalms and Isaiah, for these are the authoritative texts that appear mostin Acts, Two factors characterize the use of the Scriptures by God’s spokespersons in Acts. First, characters within Acis are concerned to show that what has happened with Jesus and what is happening with the movement of those who name him as Lord* are continuous with the Scriptures. Second and inseparably related, however, is an important proviso—namely, it is nol the Scriptures per se that speak authorita- lively but the Scriptures as they bear witness to God's purpose, an interpretation accessible only in lightof the mission, death and exaltation of Jesus of Nazareth, Hence, even if itis vital that the actions of the Christian community be grounded in Scripture, that their christological formulations be shaped in. dialogue with Scrip ture, and that they understand the rejection of the message by some Jews and the mission t the Gentiles via scriptural precedent, the Scriptures speak authoritatively only when they are legit- mately interpreted, "This suggests that the primary significance of the Scriptures in Acts is ecclesiological and hermeneutical, as the Christian community struggles with its own identity, not least over against those who also read the Scriptures but who refuse faith in Christ. In Luke's view it is through the Scriptures that Jesus’ followers should be able to confirm their status as the heirs of the Scriptures, God’s people serving God's mission. The struggle with the Jewish people and with Jewish institutions in Acts is essentially hermeneutical: Who interprets the Scriptures faithfully? Or, to put it more starkly, Whose interpretation has the divine imprima- tur? Whose receives divine legitimation? In Act the answ hy God ( rection a 26). Thos his witnes ineludes (e.g, Acts is further God does 97 idly appea tual stand- of the acti known, the Sality of th because th nence of G the Spirit 1 freedom o Lord!’s wir Spirit but a work whose Just as ¢ through th S:21-235 deh, would empe nesses in Ac the mission Powers witn signs and ya in the minise ‘universal rea the mesage 12; cf. Act 836, 13), One of the trayal of the | the breaching Gentile, The primary ways tent of salyatio economy of s has been pou thus clarifies t Gentiles (Acts This autho further, howev prophets proph their messages The plot of t through which shown to beali Christian missi¢ Apostles the answer is simple: Jesus has been accredited by God (Acts 2:22) and vindicated in his resur rection and ascension (€.g.. Acts 2:23-36; 3:13- 26). Those whose form of life is like his serve as his witnesses, and their charismatic preaching* includes authorized scripual interpretation (eg, Acts 48-13). The validity of their message is further validated by the signs* and wonders God does through them (Acts 14:3). 5.1.3, The Holy Spirit, I God does not explic- idly appear within the narrative of Acts, his vir~ is the Holy Spirit, and itis by means of theactivity of the Spirit that God's purpose is known, the mission is directed and the univer ty of the gospel is legitimated. This is not because the Holy Spirit is for Luke the imma- nence of God, ass often suggested, but because the Spirit highlights God’s transcendence, his freedom of purpose. Throughout Acts, the Lord's witnesses never control or possess the rit but attempt to catch up with the Spirit's work whose activity is often serendipitous, Just as the Spirit had been active in and through the whole of Jesus’ ministry (ef. Lk 321-22) 4:1, 14-15, 18-19; et al.), so the Spirit would empower the mission of the Lord’s wit- nesses in Acts (esp. Acts 1:8). The Spirit directa the mission (c.g., Acts 18:1-4; 16:67) and em- powers witness in word and deed. Within Acts, signs and wonders certily the presence of God. in the ministry of his witnesses, legitimating the universal reach of salvation as they authenticate the message among the Gentiles (Acts 14:3; 15:19; cf. Acts 2:19, 22, 43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 7:36; 8:6, 13). One of the primary purposes of Luke's por: trayal of the Spirit's activity is legitimation for the breaching of barriers that separate Jew and Gentile, The gift of the Spirit is one of the primary ways in which Luke articulates the con- tentofsalvation (see 5.2.2 below), and in Luke's economy of salvation those on whom the Spirit has been poured out are believers. The Spirit thus clarifies the status of believers, especially Gentiles (Acts 10:45-47; 11:15-18; 15:8). This authorizing role of the Spirit reaches further, however. It is through the Spirit that prophets prophesy in Acts, ancl this verifies that their messages are grounded in the divine will The plot of the narrative itself, behind and through which the Spirit is active, shown to bea faithful interpretation of the ea Christian. mission, Moreove tual stand presentation of the Spirit is in its essence con- tinuous with the understanding of the Spirit in Second Temple Judaism, he portrays the Chris tian mission, which proceeds with the direction and empowerment of the Spirit, as the fulfil ment of Israel. This js tue even if in the Lukan conception the activity of the Spirit has been recast along christological lines: Spirivempow- ered witness focuses on Christ, and itis through the agency of the exalted Messiah that the Spirit is poured out (Acts 2:33) Luke's pneumatology can be viewed as provid- ing an apologetic for God; the Spirit substanti- ates the direction God's purpose takes In Acts: As a consequence from Israel to the life and ministry of Jesus 10 the early church with its inclusion of Gentile believers as full pardeipants. 5.2. Salvation. Salvation is the principal theme of Acts, its narrative centrally concerned with the realization of God's purpose to bring salvation in all of its fullness to all people, Con flict within the narrative arises asa consequence of the division between those who embrace and serve that aim, who join the community of God's people who bear witness to God's s work, and those who refuse to do so (ef. Lk 2:34; cc Green 1997) 5.2.1. God as Sav salvation is first andl always from God, God initi- ates salvation, and even in the salvific activity of Jesus, C vitic jor, Jesus as Sevvion For Luke od is the often silent but nonetheless pr suis! powerful deedsare repeat: edly attributed to God (Acts 2:22; 10:38), God appointed him Lord and Messiah; God glorified him, sent him, raised him and so on, Luke's soteriology is christocentric, but above all it is theocentric. (Given the strength of this emph sis, itis not surprising [contra those who find in Actsa “divine nan" portrayal of the apostles Paul} that those who align themselves with God's salvific aim in Acts are never credited with possessing the power to signs and wonders that partia missionary activity are effected by God, granted by the Lord [ef., e.g., Acts 3:12, 16; 4:10, 25-80; Br, 9839; B1B24; 14:3, 14-15; eval. ).) Nevertheless, Jesus is God’s agent of tion, the Savior (Lk 2:11; Acts 5:30:31); as Lord, Jesus is the one on whom people call for salva: tion, How did Jesus achieve this status? For Luke, a corollary of Jesus’ being raised up is that he now administers the promise® of the Father (ch. Lk 11:18; 24:49; Acts 1:4), the gift of the ry actor and inister salvation. The ly constitute the 19Acts of the Apostles —— Spirit—that is, salvation (Acts 2:20:36). Simi larly in Acty 5:30.81 we find a suaightforward affirmation that Jesus’ confirmation as Savior, as thie one who “gives” repentance and forgive- ness, is grouncled in his resurrection and asce sion, As the enthroned one (Messiah), as the Benefactor of the people (Lord), the exalted Jesus now reigns as Savior, pouring out the blessings of salvation, including the Spirit with whoo he was anointed at the outset of his ministry, to all What then of the crucifixion of Jesus? The sheer frequency of times that we read in Acts of the divine necessity (dei) of the suffering of Jesus is warning enough that salvation has not come in spite of the crucifixion of Jesus. What is more, the specifically covenantal® language employed in Acts 20:28 (peripairomai, “to ac: quire”; cf. Ex 19:5; Is 49:21) and Acts 20:32; 26:18 (hagiazo, “to sanctify”; of, Deut 38:3 minds us of Luke's record of Jesus’ last me with his disciples, wherein he grounds the “new covenant” in his own death (Lk 22:19:20). Al though sparsely mentioned, the salvific effect of the cross is not absent from Luke, even if itis hot woven fully into the fabric of Luke's theok- ogy of the cross. Luke’s broader perspective on the suffering” of the Messiah can be outlined along three interrelated lines. First, the rejection of Jesus by the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem leads to the widening of the mission lo embrace all peoples, Jew and Gentile, Indeed, suffering and rejection foster the propagation of the word (cf. Lk 21:13+1 Acts 13:44-49; 14:1-18; 18:26; 28:17-29). As Luke is fond of narrating, struggle and opposi- tion do not impede but seem to promote the progress of the gospel: “It is through many persecutions that we must enter the kingdom of God? (Acts 14:2; cf, eg., Acts 6:1, 75 8:13, 4), Second, the passion of Jesus is paradigmatic forall of those who follow Jesus (cf. LK 9:25; Acts 9:16). For Luke the theologia crucis is rooted not so much in a theory of the atonement but in a narrative portrayal of the life of faithful discipleship as the way of the cross. ‘Third, in describing Jesus’ crucifixion, Acts echoes the words of Deuteronomy 21:22-23: Jesus was “hung on a tree” (Acts 5:30; 10:89; 13:29), The narrative thus signals the disgrace of Jesus! execution while at the sume time it locates Jesus’ death firmly in the necessity of 20 God's purpose. The ultimate disgrace, the curse from God, is antecedent. (o exaltation, Thus in his suffering and resurrection Jesus embodied the fullness of salvation interpreted as status reversal; his death was the center point of the divine-human struggle over how life is 0 be lived, in humility or setfglorification. Though ‘od, though righteous before God, nt, he is put 1. Rejected ed up by God—and with him ised. [1 anoiniied by though innoe by people, he is rai the least, the lost, the left outare also his death, and in consequence of his resurre tion by God, the way of salvation is exemplified and made accessible to all those who will follow. 5.2.2, The Message of Satoation. Luke develops the content of salvation along five related lines First, salvation entails incorporation and par- ticipation in the christocentric community of Goul’s people, These are people whose unity is the narrative (e4g., Acts 114-15, 245 Acts 244-45; 4 11; Plato. Ref 5.46.26; Cicero De Offic. 1.16.51; Aristotle Edi, Nic, 9.8.11 68h us JW. 28.8 §§129-98), who togettier “Gill on the name of the Lord (Jesus]" and are baptized in his name (Acts 2:21-28, 38; 8:16; 9:14, 21; 10:48; 19:5; 22:16); who heal (Acts 4:6, 16; 4:10, 80; 19:13) and preach (Acts 4:12; 5:28, 40) in his name; and who suffer for his name (Acts 5:41; 9:16; 21:13). What may be surprising is the identification of those who belong to this community. The invitation is for everyone, for “you, your chil dren and all who are far of!" (Acts 57:19; Acts 1:8; 2:5, 911, 17, 21; 10:L—1 al,). By pouring upon them the blessing of forgiveness and the gift of the Spirit, God both testifies to the authenticity of the membership ‘of Gentiles in the number of God's people and confirms that “he has inade no distinction be- tween them and us” (Acts 15:78; ef. 11:15:18) Jesus is Lord ofall (Acts 10:48), Also “saved” are those set apart from normal social discourse by sickness and demon possession (¢.g., Acts S:1— 4:12; 8:1 216; 8:7; 14:8-10), This reminds us that the Lukan soteriology knows no distinction be: (ween the physical, spiritual and social; that in the larger Greco-Roman world “salvation” would be recognized in the healing of physical disorders; and that physical restoration had as one of its ramifications restoration to social sinc intercourse. Second, salvation entails “rescue from our enemies” (cf, Lk 1:68:79), Salvation as divine rescue doc but there For examy brings ont reminding the downf pose, and ¢ logy to ch 7:25). Salv; concrete fo salvation is the threat o at sea (Act prison andr 16:19-40; 19 What of (as anticipat though Luke of Roman o relativizingo R. J. Cassidy for Luke, the ance is need power of evi forms of opp This form of's; ness, of Satan’ 26:17-18; 5:16; Third, salva Luke continu firmly rooted i Third Gospel 18:38; 15:9; 9: newed or new with God's peo, persons exclid from the comn giveness marks nity, Fourth, salva Spirit. Peter als to the message 1 the Holy Spirit” will resurface re 1i15-17; 15:8), Persons, whether the community o fies the status of believ Finally, the of sponse. The nec Programmatically cost address, wherActs of the Apostles rescue does not appear to be prominentin Acts, but there are important hints in this direct Fo 28-52 in Acts 2 brings onto the stage apocalyptic connotations reminding us that the coming of God signifies the downfall of those who oppose God's pur pose, and elsewhere Luke employs exodus typo- logy to characterize salvation (Acts 3:17-26; :25). Salvation as rescue from peril takes on ce nguage of salvation is used to signify safe travel in spite of the threat of ambush (Acts 28:16-24) or storms at sea (Acs 27:31, 43—28:6) or escape from prison and mob action (ef, Acts 5:17-215 12:1-19) 16:19-40; 19:2341), What of salvation from foreign do: (a8 anticipated in Zechariah’s song)? F though Luke does not report the dismantling of Roman overlordship, he does narrate the relativizing of the sovereignty Rom R, J. Cassidy has suggested. More importantly for Luke, the real enemy from which deliver ance is needed is not Rome but the cosmic power of evil resident and active behind all forms of opposition to God and God's people. This form of salvation—from the power of dark- ness, of Satan+—is pron Acts (eg., Acts 26:17-18; 5:16; 13:4-12; 16:16-18; 19:8-20) ‘Third, salvation is forgiveness of sins. In Acts, Luke co firmly rooted in Jesus’ mission according to the Third Gospel (see Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43; 18:38; 15:9; 22:16; 26:18). This signals ar hewed or new relationship with God but also with God's people: as sin is the means by which persons exclude themselves or are exchided from the community of God's people, so for- giveness marks their restoration to the commu- nity, Fourth, salvation is the reception of the Holy Spirit. Peter also promises those who respond to the message that they will receive “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38), an emphasis th: face repeatedly (Acts 9:17; 10-48-44; ). The gift of the Spirit marks persons, whether Gentile or Jew, as members of the community of God’s people and thus clark fies the status of those, especially Gentiles, who believe, Finally, the offer of salvation calls for re= sponse. The necessity of response is set forth programmatically in the narration of the Pente- cost address, where Peter is interrupted by his example, the use of Joel icrete form elsewhere when the I wielded, as nues an emphasis on forgiveness audience: “What shall we do?* (Acts 2:87; ef 16:30-34), What is the appropriate response (o the good news of salvation? Luke addresses this question with an arsenal of possibilities—ealls to believe (Acts 2:44; 9:16; 11:17; 13:39; 14 15:7; 16:30-81; 18:8), to be baptized (Acts 2:41 8:12, 36; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15) and to turn to God or to repent (Acts 2:38; 8:19; 5:31; 11:1 17:30; 20:21; 26:20); and other potential re= sponses, including some that employ meta- phors of illumination (e.g, Acts 26:17-18)—b singles out no particular pattern of response as paradigmatic, God has acted graciously in Christ to bring salvation to all humanity. All humanity is called to weleome the good news, to respond with receptivity and thus to share in that salvation not only as recipients but also as those who serve God's reclemptive aim. 5.2.3, Bschatology, Students of Acts have long noticed that eschatological hope has not been developed within the narrative, Although the future of sal 8 (ee Acts 322 7:31; 10:42), the focus has moved from th eschaton to the present, In Acts 1:68 Jesus reorients concerns about the restoration of the kingdom (o Israel, an eschatological concern, to the importance of faithful witness in the present, This should not be taken asan attempt on Luke's part Lo diminish the importance of the Parousia (as Conzelmamn argued); in coun- seling agnosticism about “the times and sea hed by the Father (Acts 1:7), Je emphasizes the unpredictability of the Parousia, “Luke sought to reinforce living es chatological faith, all the while summoning his readers to vigilant, faithful service” (Carroll, 166), That is, Luke employs eschatology asa motivation for 1 5.24. Judaism. The question of Luke's rela- tionship (o Jewish institutions and Jewish peo ple is one of the most debated in Lukan studies, with some scholarsanguing that Luke’s theology is irretrievably antiJewish, others insisting that Lukan thought derives from a lively Jewish Christian church and many viewpoints falling between these poles. (For representative views sce Tyson.) How does the Lukan treatment of people and things Jewish point toward Luke's overall purpose? Without engaging fully this larger debate, two observations are possible. First, the centrality of the temple and the synagogue," the continuous use of Israel’s Seriph sons” estab ssion. °s, the primacy of the mission to the 21Acts of the Apostle Jewish people—these and related phenomena within the narrative of Acts suggest the degree to which the story of the Christian community is continuous with the ancient story of God's people. Second, however, the critical perspective on the temple and the synagogue, for example, and the contested nature of the relationship between the Christian movement and Jewish structures suggests the degree to which the Ju- daism with which Luke is interested is an inter= preted Judaism. ‘That is, “the retigion of Isracl—its institutions, practices, and so on—is to be embraced fully when understood wisd-vis the redemptive purpose of God, Butin order to be understood thus, Israel's religion must co- here with the purpose of God as articulated by God's own authorized interpretive agent, God's Son, Jesus of Nazareth” and in Acisby the Lord’s witnesses who thus serve as interpretive agents (Green 1998, 75). This perspective on the ques- tion of Judaism within Acts underscores the nature of the fundamental struggle between the Christian movement and its representatives on the one hand, Judaism on the other, just as it also provides a rationale for the opposition faced by that movement, 5.3, Discipleship. The interdependence of the Gospel of Luke and Actsis perhaps nowhere than in the Lukin perspective on discipleship. Especially when compared with the ather Synoptic Gospels, the Third Gospel is noteworthy for how little it has the disciples participating in Jesus’ ministry. This is easily expla nce the Third Gospel can provide instruction and models for discipleship while allowing Acts to document more fully how the disciples came to serve actively in the missionary work of Jesus. Among the motifs that might be developed, two are of particular importance: economic koinonia and witness and allegiance. 5.3.1. Economie Koinonia, Throughout the ‘Third Gospel, Jesus’ message has returned again and again (o undercut the determination of social relations on the basis of widespread canons of status and to affirm the redefinition of economic relations within the community of his followers. These two points address the same set of issues, since economic exchange tic clations, Pac trons, for example, have higher status than their clients, and in their acts of benefaction they obligate others to supply them with loyalty, re fune- and representation of social 22 ognition, venerated status. Among friends and within kinship groups, however, giving and re- ceiving need not have stipulations carried over {vom the patronal ethie that pervaded the em- pire, In these cases giving is a function not of obligations and debt but of mutuality, generos: ity, solidarity and need, Economic koinonia would thus grow out of, as well as symbolize, kinship, ‘What Jesus had called for in his Sermon on the Plain (Lk 6:27-88, esp. Lk 6:85)—disposi- tions of kinship giving rise to practices of mate rial generosity—the early church is reported to practice (Acts 24445; 4:32—5:11; see also Acts 6:16; 11:27-30). What Luke describes in the summary statements of Acts 244-45 and Acts 39. '5, however, is not communitarianism, cither asa requisite for belonging to the people of God or as an ideal, Instead he out disposition of kinship and generosity, an orien- tation toward the needs of others and toward the generosity of God that characterizes the Christian community outside the normal con- straints of reciprocity and the gif-obligation cycle, Accordingly Barnabas is ingoduced as an exemplary figure who embodied the ideal of Kinship that was to characterize the whole con munity (Acis 4:32, 96-97). Similarly Ananiasand Sapphira demonstrate by their falsehood and their choice of private ownership that they have not refused the way of patronage and stat seeking of the larger empire and so that they are not members of this new community of God's people (Acts 5:1-11) 5.3.2, Witness and Allegiance, One of the hall marks of Luke's narrative is the consistency with which faithful witnesses attract opposition and with which opposition leads to the spread of the gospel. Exemplars include Jesus, Peterand John (cog., Acts 4:23-31; 5:41-42), Stephen (Acts 8: 4) and Paul (e.g., Acts 13:45-49), The conflict surrounding these key characte fulness is underscored repeatedly by the narra- tor (og., Acts S:l4-15; 5:38.99; 6:8-10; 7:55 25:25; 26:32; 28:17-22), portencls the opposition that faithful witnesses outside the narrative, in cluding those among Luke's audience, may also encounter in the course of the mission. ‘hat is, opposition in the course of the church's mission should not necessarily be ine terpreted asa sign of misapprehension of th divine purpose, Faithfulness calls for a fund: tal allegiance to Jesus as Lord, which calls es a , whose faith= Bbc teActs of the Apostles for a basic social and political stance within the empire (Cassidy), and this may well generate opposition. Peter, John, Stephen and Paul may thus serve as models for Christians who in the course of the church’s mission face simit struggles. ‘Soe also CORNELIUS; EVANGELISM IN 'THE EARLY CuK; Genres, GENTILE Mission; HBL LENISTS; MIRAGLESIN ACTS; MISSION, EARLYNON- PAULINE: NARRATIVE CRITICISM; OLD TESTAMENT IN ACTS; PAUL AND PAULINISMS IN Acts; Per COST; PHILIP THE EVANGELIST; SAMARIA; SIGNS anb WONDERS; STEPH BisLioGrary. Bibliographies: F Bovon, Luke the Theologian: Thirty-Three Years of Research (1950- 83) (PTMS 12; Allison Park, PA: Pickwick, 1987);). B. Green and M. C, McKeever, Luke-Acts and New lestament Historiography (IBRB 8: Rapids: Baker, 1994); A. J. Maul Jr. and M, B, Mattill, A Classified Bibliography of Literature on the Ads of the Aposiles (NTTS 7; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965); W. E, Mills, A Bibliography of the Periodical Literature on the Acts of the Apostles 1962-1984 jovTSup 58; Leiden: 1, J. Brill, 1986); P. F. Stuehrenberg, “The Study of Acts before the Reform: A ographie Introduc Nov 29 (1987) 100-36. Commentaries: C, K, Barrett, The Acts of the Apostles (2 vols.; I Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994); 8. F. Bruce, The Adds ofthe Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary (3d ed; Leicester: Inter-Varsity (Apollos) /Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990); idem, The Book of the Acts (NICNT; rev. ed Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988); H. Conzi mann, The Ads of the Apostles: A Comientary on the Acs of the Apostles (Herm; Philadelphia: For- tress, 1987); E. Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary (Oxford; Blackwell; Philadelphis Westminster, 1971); L.'T. Johnson, TeAels of the Aposiles (SP 5; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992); 1. H. Marshall, Tie Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary (TNTC; Leicester Inter-Varsity; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980) R Pesch, Die Apestelgeschichte (2 vols,; Zarich: Benziger; Neukirchen-Vinyr Neukirchener, 1986); J. B. Polhill, Act (NAC; Nashville: Broadman, 1992); G. Schneider, Die Apostelgeschichte (2 vols; HTKNT 5; Freiburg Herder, 1980, 1982); R. C, Tannehill, The Nar tative Unity of LukeActs: A Literary Interpretation, 2% The Acts of the Apostles (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); B. Witherington IIT, The Adts of the Apos es: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rap. Srand ids; Berdmans, 1977). Studies: L. ©, A. Alexane der, The Prefice to Lake's Gaspet: Literary Conven tion and Social Context im Luke J: 1-4 and Acts 1:1 (SNTSMS 78; Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1993); D. E. Aune, Tee New Testament in Its Literary Envirrument (LEC 8; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987) esp. 77-157; D. L. Barr and J. L, Wentling, “The Convention of Classical Biography and the Genre of Luke-Acts: A Pre- Jiminary Study” in Leuke-Acts: New Perspective the Society of Biblical Literature Sentinar, e«. C. He ‘Talbert (New York: Grossroad, 1984) 68-88; M.- E, Boismard and A, Lamouille, Le Texte Occiden: tal des Actes des Apdtres: Reconstitution et Réhabitatiation (2vols.; Paris: Recherche sur les Givilisations, 1984); F. F, Bruce, The Speeches in the Acts of the Apostles (London: Tyndale, 1942); H. J. Cadbury, Commentary on the Preface of Luke” in The Beginnings of Christianity, pt. 1: The Acts of the Apostles, ed, F, J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake (5 vols; London: Macmillan, 1922; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979 repr.) 2:489-510; jem, The Making of Luke-Acts (2d ed.;, London: POK, 1958); J. T. Carroll, Response to the End of History: Eschatology and Situation in LukeAds (SBLDS 92; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988); R. J Cassidly, Society ancl Politics in the Acts of the Apostles (Maryknoll, NY; Orbis, 1987);M. Dibelius, Saud ies in the Acts of the Aposites (London: SOM; New York: Scribner's, 1956); P. F. Esler, Community and Gospel in Lathe-Acts: The Social and Potivieat Motivations of Lukan Theology (SNUSMS 57; Came bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987); J. A. Fitzmyer, Latke the Theologian: Aspects of His Teach. ing (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist, 1989); 8. R. Garrett, ‘The Demise of the Devil: Magic unit the Demonic in Luke's Writings (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989); C. H. Gempf, “Public Speaking and Published Ae- counts” in The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting. ed. B. W. Winter and A, D. Clarke (BAECS 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 259- 803; J. B. Green, “Internal Repetition in Luke- Acts; Contemporary Narratology and Lukan Historiography” in History, Literature and Society in the Book of Acts, cd, Ben Witherington IL (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 283.99; idem, “Phe Problem of a Begin- ning: Israel's Scriptures in Luke 1-2,” BBR 4 (1994) 61-85; iclem, “Salvation to the End ofthe Barth’ (Acts 13:47): God as Savior in the Acts of the Apostles” in The Book of Acts and ts Theotogy, ed. 1. H, Marshall and D, Peterson (BAFCS 6; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997) 83-106; idem, 23Adversaries The Theology of the Gospel of Luke (NTT; Cam bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); R.A. Hahn, Sickness and Healing: An Anthropo- logical Perspeetive (New Haven, CT: Yale Univer ty Press, 1995); R. G. Hall, Revealed Histories Techniques for Ancient Jewish and Christian Histor ography (JSPSup 6; Sheffield: JSOT, 1991); C. J. Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History ed. GH. Geanpt (WUNT 4 Acts and the History of Earliest don: SCM; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979 Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, eds, The Beginnings of Christianity, pt. 1: The Acts of the Apostles (5 vols. London: Macmillan, 1920-33; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979, repr.); J. Jervell, The Theology of the Adis of the Apostles (NTT; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); M. Korn, Die Geschichte Jesu in erinderter Zeit: Stulien zur Weibenden Bex dendung Jesu im lukanischen Doppetwerk (WUNT 2.51; Thbingen: J. C, B, Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1998); M. Krieger, ec, The Aims of Representation: Suubjeet/ Text/History (New York: Columbia Unie versity Press, 1987; Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Uni- versity Press, 1993, repr); W. S. Kurs, Reading Luke-Acts: Dynamics of Biblical Narrative (Lowis- ville, KY: Westninster/Joh Knox, 1998); R. Maddox, Phe Purpase of Luke-Acts (FRLANT 126; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982); IH. Marshall, The Acts of the Apastles (NTC Sheffield: JSOT, 1992); J. H. Neyrey, “The For rensic Defense Speech and Paul's ‘Tvial Speeches in Acts 22.96: Form and Functio Lauke-Acts: New Perspectives from the Society of Bibl cal Literature Seminar, ed. C, H. Talbert (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 210-24; idem, ec, The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991); C. D. Os burn, “The Search for the Original Text of Acts: The International Project on the Text of Acts,” JSNT 44 (1991) 99-55; M, C, Parsons and R. I Pervo, Rethinking the Unity of Luke and Acts (Ml neapolis: Fortress, 1993); R. L Peryo, Profit with Delight: The Literary Genre of the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987); M. A. Powell, What Ave They Saying About Acts? (Mahwah, NJ Paulist, 1991); D. Schwartz, "The End of the Line: Paul in the Canonical Book of Acts” in Paul and the Legacies of Paul, ed. W (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1900) $24; M. L. Soards, The Speeches im Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns (Louisville, KY: Westminsier/John Knox, 1994); J.T. cork 24 Squires, The Plan of God in Luke-Acts (SNTSMS 76; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); G. L. Sterling, Historiography anu Self-Defi- nition: fosopaes, Lauko-Aets and Apologetic Historiog- mphy (NovT Sup 64; Leiden: E, J, Brill, 1992); B. Stock, Listening for the Text: On the Uses of the Past (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990); W. Ac Strange, The Problem of the Text of Acts (SNTSMS 71; Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1992); C. H. Talbert, Literary Pat terns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Adts (SBLMS 20; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974); R, C, Tannchill, “The Functions of Pe- ter's Mission Speeches in the Narrative of Acts,” (1991) 400-14; M. Turner, Powter from on Spinit in Israel's Restoration and Witness in Luke-Acts (JPTSup 9; Sheffield: Sheffield Aca- demic Press, 1996); J. B. Tyson, ed., Luke-Acts cond the Jewish People: Bight Critical Perspectives (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988); W. C. van Un nik, Sparsa Colleeta: The Collected Essays of We G. van Unnik, pt. 1: Evangelia—Pantina—Ada (NovTSup 29; Leiden: E, J, Brill, 1973) esp. 615, 340-73; P. W. Walaskay, ‘And So We Caine to Rome’: ‘The Political Perspective of St. Luke (SNTSMS 49; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983); R. W. Wall, “The Acts of the Apostles in Canoni- cal Context,” BTB 18 (1988) 16-24; H. White, ‘The Content of the Farm: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation (Baltimore: Johns Hop- kins University Press, 1987); U. Wilekens, Die Missionsreden der Apastelgeschichte: Form: und. tra- ditionsgeschichiliche Untersuchungen (3d ed.; WMANT 5; NeukirchenViuyn: Neukirchener, 1974); B. W. Winter, ed., The Book of Acts in Its Finst-Contury Setting (6vols.; Grand Rapids: Ferd- mans, 1993-97); B. Witherington IIL, ed., His tory, Literature and Society in the Book of Acts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), J.B. Green ACTS OF THOMAS. Se Avoceyruiat, AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHAL WRITINGS, ADOPTIONISM. See CriristoLocy; Do. CETISM, JEWISH CHRISTIANITY ADULTERY. Sec MARRIAGE, DIVORCEAND ADUL, TERY, ADVERSARIES Several later NT writings combat what their authors view as unacceptable beliefs and prac- tices, As they do, diversity of earl have usually iden of these writings. tion, This identin struction of the century which en mary heresy Chris Assumed that sinc that period, thei Gnostic and coul very little eviden has recognized di by the developing. 50 less often simply adversary for these 2. Revelation 3, Johannine Ep 4. Jude 5.2 Peter 6. Pastoral Episu 7. Ignatius of An 8, Ebionites 9. Gnosties 1. Defining Adversa Adversaries, unders themselves as Christ farewell discourse in rejected and oppose NOt part of the oceas 1 Peter,* for example bled by persecution, tohelp them interpre but has no Chi ‘istian writings mention una having the defeat of i as their primary goal, Purpose of James is tions, but it alludes teaching which it rej opposed in passing, nents is not central to It is also necessary correcting dangerous Gies or views and op every person who h thought needed corre adversary, Hebrews of cultic: practices associa temple or its replacet inclinations are not, hoyAdversaries tices. As they do, they are setting limits to the diversity of earliest Christianity. Interpreters have usually identified the adversaries of most of these writings as Gnostics of some descrip- ion. This identification was based on a recon- struction of the late first and early second century which envisioned Gnosticism as the pri mary he yy Christians faced. Thus it was simply assumed that since writings come from that period, their adversaries were probably Gnostic and could be identified as such with very lite evidence has recognized diversity among those rejected by the developing orthodoxy of this period and so less often simply ass adversary for these writings. 1, Defining Adversaries 2, Revelation 8, Johannine Epistles 4 Jude 5.2 Peter 6, Pastoral [ 7. Ignatius of Anti 8, Ebionites 9. Gnostics More recent scholarship esa particular type of 1, Defining Adversaries. Adversaries, themselves as Christians (hinted at in Paul's farewell discourse in Acts 20:29-30) but who are rejected and opposed by a particukarauthor, are not part of the occasion of all late NT writings. 1 Peter," for example, addresses Christians trou bled by persecution," offering encouragement to help them interpretand endure persecution, but has no Christian adversaries in view, Other writings mention unacceptable views while not haying the defeat of those who hold these views primary goal, For example, the central purpose of James* is Lo pass on ethical instruc tions, but it alludes to some use of Pauline teaching which it rejects (2:18.26). This view is, opposed in passing, but opposing its propo hents is not central to the purpose of James, Itis also necessary to distinguish between correcting dangerous or unacceptable tenden- cies or yiews and opposing adversaries. Not every person who held views our authors thought needed correction was viewed as an adversary, Hebrews" opposes some attraction to cultic practices associated with the Jerusalem temple or its replacement. Those with such inclinationsare not, however, ( derstood as those who identify as. das heretics or adversaries, but rather as Christians in need of instruction, When the primary goal is the defeat of ad- versaries, later NT writings often take up a po- lemnieal tone, whieh means that many of their accusations and charges cannot be straightfor wardly attributed to their adversaries. In both early Christian and earlier non-Christian writ ings, polemics often involved stock charges of immorality applicd to whatever opposition one encountered, Often this was done in the belief that deviation from the vivably led to such behavior, Thus we must be cautious when such charges appear. ple aceep 2, Revelation. Revelation” is a special case. Its primary pw pose ng persecit tion, but the opening section (Rey 13) treats some within the communities addressed as ad- versaries, The are often thought to address a single (ype of Iversary. But some interpreters resist this as sumption and examine them individually be: fore making connection ry repudiated in Revelation 1—8 have been iden- tified as Gnostic libertines or libertines with gnostic tendencies, A few interpreters find a dispute betwee Jewish Christians (see Jewish Christianity), with John taking the more conservativ Many interpreters identify these adyersarie Christians willing to accommodate themselves to the culture by participating in trade guild meelings which were held in temples and in cluded a meal in which saccificed® food® was eaten, Only the levers to Ephesus, Pergamum and ‘Phyatira deal with adversaries. wi chureh. The Nicolaitans are mentioned in the messages to both Ephesus and Pergamum, John commends the Ephesiatis for hating the Nico- laitany and for rejecting some who elaim to be apostles.* If, as seems probable, these apostles were Nicolaitans, this brand of teaching: was brouglit to Ephesus by teachers claiming some yy" But it scems they were unsuccessful ¢. There is no hint of the content of their to encourage those endu ven “letters” to the churches* oderate and consi position. autho: th teaching. John rebukes the chureh at Perg mum for having w 1 Balam. While it initially appears that these are separate groups, the name Bakar is probably in is €% gregution fans and those who hold the teachin 25Adversaries used metaphorically for the Nicolaitans, be- cause the two tames have similar meanings Again, no teachings are aseribed to the Nico! tans, The Balaamites are aceused of eating food sacrificed to idols* and of fornication, The charge of fornication is probably figurative, standing for religious infidelity. This is its usual meaning in Revelation, Additionally, fornica- tion had long been associated with idolatry (sec Num 25:1-2, which immediately follows the Balaam story, and the apostolic decree in Acts 1:29.24) . Since this accusation is a polemically charged metaphor, these Balaamites are not libertines. The only other charge leveled against them is that they eat idol meat. Such conduct was viewed as an unacceptable accom mocation to the surrounding culture. John condemns the Thyatirans for tolerating Jezebel, who is accused of teaching and practic- ing fornication and eating sacriliced meat. This Jezebel, who claimed to be a prophet, must have been an influential member of this church, The charge of fornication is again metaphorical. So he only praetice Jezebel is condemned for is cating idol meat, the same accusation made against the Nicolaitans/Balaamites. However, he Seer adds that those who follow Jezebel call their teaching "the deep things of Satan.” It doubtful that the followers of Jezebel attribute their teachings to Satan, but they must claim eating of idol some insight that reconciles thei meat and Christian conduct Inthe end, all the adversaries mentioned are accused only of eating idol meat, and thus of being unfaithful, So John’s opposition to then, js based on their accommodation to the sur nding culture and whatever reasons they is no evidence that give for allowing it, There allows us to associate any tendency of these adversaries, whether taken individually or as a group, with any other known group. 3. Johannine Epistles. The adversaries of 1 and 2 John (see John, Lee ters off are usually discussed together, and 3 John is often included within the same broad situation as well, The opponents of both Land QJohn ave recognized as former members of the Johannine community who have split off from that group. Nearly all interpreters understand the debate to be over the proper interpretation of the traditions* now found in John. Through- out the first half of the twentieth century most 26 interpreters identified these separatists as do- J" libertine Gnosties, However, many re- cent interpreters deny that these adversaries were Gnostic, libertine or fully docetic. Several (egy Brown) argue that these opponents deny only the salvific significance of Jesus’ earthly life, not the reality of his material existence, Some interpreters also find 1 John opposing an acloptionist christology® and argue that the separatists see the life of Jesus as one phase of work of the “div nilarly, Painter identifics them as pneumatics who sec Jesus as merely an example of the spiritual person's life, 3.1. Tfohn. | John yields clear evidence that its adversaries have seceded from the addressed community and are now viewed as enemies; they are even identified asantichrists* (1 Jn 2:18+19) Two issues dominate 1 John: keeping the com mandinents (particularly the love command ment) and christology 1 John frames the christologieal debate so that denying that Jesus is the Chiist* is equiva. lent to denying “the Son” (1 Jn 2:22-28), and these are [uu'ther synonymous with denying “Je sus? and not confessing that “Jesus Christ i come in flesh (1 Jn 4:23). These carefully worded statements indicate that the adversaries separate the earthly Jesus from the Si way unacceptable to 1 John, perhaps denying that the heavenly Christ is «o be fully identified h the human Jesus. 1 John’s prologue (1 Jn 1:1-4) supports the notion that these adversaries have a docetic tendency, as does 1 John 4:3, where the issue is cast as denying Jesus. If they are docetists, they are not necessarily Gnostics. Ope needs only the common Hellenistic des valuing of the material world* to find docetism attractive. However, the question may not be whether Jesus had a material body, but rather whether Jesus is to be fully identified with the Son of God (ser Son of God), or for how long such an identification is envisioned. The oppor nents may have an adoptionist christology that. has the Son come upon Jesus at his baptism. This could be based in part on their interpreta- jon of the first chapter of the Gospel of John. But this part of the adversaries’ christology may not be at issue; the dispute may concern when or whether the Son separated himself from Jesus, Most interpreters see the reference to blood in J John 5:56 as an allusion to the rucifixion, The antithetical structure of these mention of blood op- on in some verses suggests that thi poses some t tists. If it doe: (or the Christ ‘Jesus was. Th departure of it at least imp that death* fo tion 1 John aft 4:9-10). This u fits if the separ Thus the tr tainty is that th tology that « identification insufficiency 1 cetism, or alter ogy that does ‘enough with th before the eru tions requires : descending /as schema that t firmed, Beyond the | not keep the ec ring accusation ; that they lack k charge probabh from the Johant love is demonst: assembly of the | accusation reve ethical conduct 1 that they were Iappears fror sionists claim to | ence of the perk Tiave not sinned”) perfectionism, ba claims either that portant that sin cally sinless” (Bog ments are probab the adversaries’ vi claims. Still, they fectionism that th even as he embrac type in 1 John $:4 The rejected pe late of the separat function of theAdversaries poses some teaching advocated by the separa: tists. IF it does, they seem to deny that the Son (or the Christ) was crucified and only allow that Jesus was. This—in | John’s view—premature departure of the Son was unacceptable because it at least implicitly denied the importance of that death* for the forgiveness of sins, a fune> tion 1 John affirms as central (1 Jn 1/7; 2:1-2, 12 9-10), This understanding of I John fits if the separatists are docetists Thus the most we ean say with relative cer tainty is that these separatists advocated a ehiris- tology that does not affirm a sufficient identification of Jesus with the Son of God. That in ncy may involve some form of do: cetism, or alternatively an adoptionist christol- ogy that does not identify Jesus completely enough with the Son and has the Son leave Jesus before the crucifixion. Neither of these posi- tions requires a gnostic theology, but only a descending/ascending redeemer schema, a schema that the Johannine community al firmed. Beyond the broad indictment that they do not keep the commandments, the ring accusation about the advers that they lack love for fellow Christians, ‘Th charge probably stems from their separation from the Joh ity. Their lack of love is demonstrated by their absence from the assembly of the remaining community. So this 5.6 also ple recur s Tittle about the separatists ethical conduct and certainly does not indicate that they were libertines, Ttappears from 1 John 1:8, 10 that the seces sionists claim to be sinless. Based on the pres ence of the perfect tense in 1 John 1:18 (“Ww have not sinned”), some interpreters discern a fectionism, based on gnostic beliels, whie ims either that mate portant that sin* does not affect them or that thelr spi nature has made them cally sinless” (Bogart, 88). However, these states ments are probably 1 John’s interp the adversaries’ views, not quotations of thei claims, Stl, they must ation of cvoeate a type of per fectionism that the author of 1 John rejects, even as he embraces perfectio type in 1 John 84-9, The rejected perfectionism may be a corre late of the separatists’ denial of the expiatory function of the crucifixion: if they claimed never to have sinned, atonement would be su: ofanother perfluous (ser Death of Christ), But th tion on Jesus’ death may be based on a different understanding of the means of salvation rather than a gnost gue that the vital clement is that the Son brought down eternal til that has nothing to do with Jesus’ death (ef Brown 1979), Since | John rejects their usse inlessness in 1 John £8, 10 with com ments on the atoning function of Jesus’ death in I John 1:7, 9; 2:1-2, these two pointsare either related in the adversaries’ teachi rable from 1 Jolin’s perspective. While these ir posi- slike anthropology. ‘They may ar from God,” an act (gs OF insepie adversaries seem to cliim an advanced spiritual status that includes sinlessness, there is insuffi cient evidence to tie this claim to any system of ism or atealized eschatol thought (e.g., Gos ogy*), Perhaps 1 John denies them this, because of their christology and their secession from his community—afier all, he expects sin- lessness from those “born of God” (1 Jn 3:9) Our understanding of these separatists must remain vague. We can establish that they refixse to identify the Son of God with Jesus as com- pletely as 1 John demands and that they deny nce of the death of Jesus. spiritual status that on that they are the expiatory signifi Furthermore, they elain probably includes the asse beyond sin. There is no good evidence that they re libertines or Gnostics or that they belong to ny other known group. 3.2. 2 Jolin, The adversaries of 2 John are described in essentially identical way of LJobn, Again in 8 John these adversaries are perceived as sceessionists (2Jn 7) who have not remained “in the teaching of Christ” (2 Jn 9). ‘The Elder warns his readers to beware of the antichrist who does not confess that “Jesus Christ is come in flesh” (2 Jn 7-8). This short- hand for the aclversaries’ teaching gives more weight to the view that they are docetists, but in light of its use in I John, this phrase ambiguous to be decisive. This letter may repr resent a later stage in the dispute than | John because now there are “many” deceivers (2 Jo 7). Unfortunately, even though we can see that 1 John and 2 John address the same adver 2 Jon does not appreciably clarify our unde standing of them 3.3, 3 John, 3 John identifies the adversary by name, Diotrephes. The Elder writes that Diotre- phes is fond of holding a position of leadership, does not acknowledge the Elder’s authority, to those ari 9Adyersaries makes false charges against the Elder and does not welcome itinerant preachers ass the Elder's community. Some interpreters find here a further disintegration of the Johannine community at the hands of the adversaries of 1 and 2 John, On this reading, theadversaries ean now claim an adherent from among those with institutional authority. Others identify Diotre- phesas one ofthe first monarchical bishops and locate the dispute between him and the Elder in issues of ecclesial structure (see Chureh Order). Kasemann argues that Diowrephes le- gilimately holds the office that was soon to deyelop into the monarchical episcopacy, Oc- cupying this position, Diotrephes has, Kise: mamn asserts, excommunicated the Presbyter for being an enthusiast who valued the imme- diate encounter of the presence of Christ above the tradition. Third John serves a dual purpose: it is a commendation for Gaius and letter of recom- mendation for Demetrius as he mavels to the area where both Gaius and Diotrephes are chureh leaders, probably the leading members ‘of separate house churches in the same imme: diate area, ‘The main issue of 3 John is Diow phes’ refusal of hospitality for itinerant preachers sent by the Elder, The Elder inter prets this action as an affront to his honor, a primary value in Greco-Roman culture, and thusas both a personal matter and a matter that affects his standing in the broader Christian community in that area. While this action by Diotrephes may have been duc to doctrinal disputes, any such dispute remains veiled. If the false charges brought against the Elder involve some doctrinal issite, the text gives no indication that There is no evidence to support Kasemann’s claim that the Presbyter has been exeommuni- cated as a heretic. ‘The Elder approaches this problem as he does (i.e., he seems to be on the defensive according to Rasemann) because of Dioirephes’ position in the church, not because he has been excommunicated, The dispute could involve ecclesial structure, but again there isno evidence to support this view; itcould equally concern Diotrephes’ exercise of a ree- ognized office, Thus while we can identify this single adversary by name, we cannot identily (or assume the presence of) any doctrinal, ceclesial or ethical issues beyond inhospitality for itiner ants as the root of this struggle for control of a s is the ease. 28 segment of the Johannine commu 4. Jude. ‘The adversaries of Jude and 2 Peter* have often been identified together and assumed to be the same because 2 Peter borrows so heavily from Jude, But methodologically this is a mis- take. Even though 2 Peter uses much of Jude's polemic, he may well apply this stereotyped material to a different group, Thus, as with all NT writings, adversaries must be identified solely on the basis of the text uncer considers tion. Most interpreters find some sort of Gnostics or proto-Gnostics as the target of Jude's attack. jentification can be supported only by 1 tnore into Jude than his statements sonably permit, Most interpreters also fail to take the thoroughly polemical nature of Jude into account and so accept at fice value his often exaggerated charges and accusations Consequently they identify his adversaries. as libertines. Wisse has shown that such charges were typical of polemics in both Christian anti heretical writings and the broader Hellenistic milieu. Jude's adversaries were traveling, perhaps charismatic, teachers (Jude 4, 8) who partici- pated in the churches’ worship services (Jude 12), Their presence and teaching were causing divisions, as some accepted their teaching and others did not (Jude 18-19). This much is clear Even though Jude constantly charges these ad- versaries with being immoral, the level of po- lemic makes it doubt! th: libertines. Such charges probably do indicate that Jude anc these teachers disagree about some aspect of Christian behavior, But it is dif ficull to imagine that Jude's rather broad aucti- ence (basically all Christians, Jude 1) needed special instructions to reject the kind of sexually profligate teachers many interpreters find op- posed, Charges of “defiling the flesh” (Jude 8) ‘or even of being licentious (Jude 4) do not necessarily inclicate that these adversaries were without any moral code, At most, such charges show only that they allowed something(s) the author does not, Given that Jude is totally immersed in Jewish traditions, it seems likely that both the author and audience were Christian Jews, Itseems most likely that Jude represents more lawobs perspective than that advocated by the itinerant we should see themAdversaries teachers. If the “glories” of Jude 8 are the gels? involved with giving the law* (as interpreters assert), the “insult” of the adversar- iesis that they do not keep part of the kw. They need not be devoid of morality to insult the law and its mediators, they need only 0 ignore one aspect of it, In addition, if the waditional arch- enemies of God's people cited in Jude 11-12 are intended to portray Jude’s adver specific way, the inclusion of Rorah may be significant. In Jewish wadition he is known not ion but. also for not keeping the law properly—though with no hint of anti= nomianism. We are left with almost no clues about the aspect of the law the teachers fail to keep. ] lematic at fellowship meals (Jude 12) may indi: cate that their nonobservance involves food laws (or some other purity* regulation that complicated association at table), but this is far from certain, ies in any only for rebel Je’s characterization of them as prob- So Jude's adversaries are itinerant teachers whose primary offense involves their unde standing of the responsibilities of Christians with respect to the law. They ma experiences as evidence of the ing a more law-observant stance, Jude rejects them as the false teachers of the last day godly, lawless haughty. They undoubtedly had a different pic ture of themselves. characterizes them as u 5.2 Peter, Many interpreters also identify the adversaries of 2 Peter? as Gnastics or proto-Gnostics, in large part because they deny the Parousia* But this is insufficient evidence to make @ connec- tion with Gnosticism, for no beliefs central to Gnosticism are combated in 2 Peter. Rejecting, a gnostic conection, Neyrey identifies these adversaries as teachers who draw on Epicurean ideas that had filtered out into the broader culture, Specifically, theirdenial of the parousi isa manifestation of popular doulbts about the reality of divine judgment.* Bauckham (1983) also f ids eschatological skepticism to be their central tenet but does not connect their teach- ing with Epicurean beliefs. Based on their de nial of the ju they advocate antinomianism, Like Jude, 2 Peter isa thoroughly polemical cl fierce Bauckham argues that document. Once again, such direct polemic must be read carefully, taking into a count that stock accusations served 10 discredit, not accurately describe, adversaries, All of 2 Peter 1:16—3:13 is intended to refute, accuse and denounce the adversaries, not objectively describe them The clearest point about these adversaries, who were formerly part of the communities 2 Peter addresses (2 Pet 2:1, 15), is that they deny the Parousia (2 Pet 8:34), They based their rejection of it on two things: the passing of the first-generation Christians who thought the Parousia would occur in their lifetime (2 Pet $:8-10) and the absence of God's action against evil in the world (2 Pet 3:4-6), References to the reality of the Parousiaat the beginning and end of the polemical section (2 Pet 1:16-9:13) show that this is the central issue, In 2 Peter 1:16 the authorasserts that the Parousia isnot a myth and interprets the denial of the Parousia rejection of the apostolic testimony. While it is possible that the adversaries explicitly rejected apostolic teaching, it unlikely. though 2 Peter interprets their view in this way, it is difficult to see how they could have gained influence (2 Pet 2:2) in a community that re~ veres apostles (as the attribution of this letter to Peter indicates) if they rejected apostolic testi mony. Instead they probably argued that the apostles had been misunderstood, 2 Peter 1:16- 19 intends to make this claim untenable. It seems that these adversaries expect no future judgment, but this may only be 2 Peter's interpre Parousia. Some interpreters combine the adver- tion of the judgment with 2 Peter's tion of what it means to deny the accusations about their licentiousness to argue that they are libertines, However, this section's sharp polemic prohibits us from reading such charges literally. These denuneiations we: tended to damage the adversaries’ ethos, not accurately describe them. The writer of ¥ Peter has no doubt that the adversaries’ beliefs lead to moral corruptness, but these polemical de- nunciations are insufficient evidence that they, mple, “revel in the daytime” (2 Pet 2:13)—a stock polem 2 Peter also says that these adversaries revile “glories” (2 Pet 2:10). This expression is taken from Jude but given new meaning here. 2 Peter 2:11 indicates that these “glories” are spiritual beings subject to God's judgment, The charge of reviling may be 2 Peter's in| adversaries’ rejection of the Parousia and its in for ex: al accusation, 29Adversn attending judgment. If these “glories” are in- volved with the judgment, as Neyrey contends, they may be beings who accuse humans before God at judgment, Thus the adversaries! reviling consists in their disbelief that such judging and 8% accusing takes place. ‘These teachers also “promise freedom” to those who accept their views. Althou r indication of what this freedom volves, many sce it as freedom from moral constraint, perhaps because it is juxtaposed to the charge that the adversaries are “slaves of corruption.” But again, such polemical accusae tionsare primarily denunciation. Ifthe “glories of 2 Peter 2:10 are accusers at the judgment, the freedom of 2 Peter 2:19 may be freedom from fear of such beings. This fits well with the adver saries’ denial of the Parousia, but no interpre- tation of this freedom is certain. 2 Peter also accuses these adversaries of despising author ity* or lordship. This is & polemical implication 1 their denial of the gives no clea the author clraws fre Parousi These adversaries are further accused of “twisting” the Scriptures (2 Pet 8:15-16; ef, 1:20- 21). 2 Peter mentions Paul as an authority who agrees that the delay of the Parousia is a sign of God's patience (2 Pet 3:15), but then adds that some misuse Paul's writings and other Scrip- tures, Thisis no basis for identifying these teach- ersas hyper-Paulinists or for asserting thal they claim him as their primary authority. He may be simply one apostle they call on. However impor tant Paul is, the ret adversaries do not reject apostolic testimony, Their “twisting” of the prophets shows that par- ticular interpretations of Seripture contribute significantly to their arguments for their teach- ing 2 Peter, then, opposes teachers who pre viously held the same beliefs about the Parousia the anthor but now deny its reality and use Scripture to support their position. They do not reject apostolic authority, but 2 Peter interprets their denial of the Parousia as implying such a rejection, Their denial of the Parousia may in- clude a rejection of a final divine judgment; at least 2 Peter presents the G¥0 as necessarily related. Denial of a final judgment need not entail the removal of all moral constraints (con- sider the Sadducees), but the writer of 2 Peter is certain it will ead (o Ticentiousness. Their beliefs about the Parousia and judgment seem nce (o him shows that the 30 toallow them to claim freedom from the fear of certain spirit* beings, perhaps accusers at judge ment. Clearly, the primary issue for the writer of 2 Peter is the adversaries’ rejection of the rousia, which he sces as a rejection of Serip- ture, apostolic authority and morality. So all questions and accusations stem from this one central concern, 6. Pastoral Epistles. Although the authorship and dating of the Pax torals are debated (see DPL, Pastoral Letters), the majority opinion of scholarship is that the Pastorals are pseudepigraphic* and date from the post-Pauline era, However, those who m: tain the Pauline authorship of the Pasto frequently date these letters in the mid-60s, at the close of Paul’s life and ministry, and regard them as reflective of a changing situatio Whether Pauline or post-Pauline, the identity of the adversaries depicted in the Pastorals has long been at issu Christianity and the study of the texts under review in this volun Moxt scholars have assumed that the thr Pastoral Epistles address a single type of adve sary, ‘This single front is usually identified as a lype of Jewish Gnosticism or proto-Gnosticism. A fow interpreters, however, identify these ad- versaries as Judaizing Christians with an ascetic regime and a realized eschatology, or alterna- tively as Jewish Christ hinic exegesis and emphasize keeping the Torah and ascetic practices. Others identify them as Hellenistic-Jewish legalists, and still oth- ers sce the main problem to be that these teack- ers are perceived as a threat by those in authority, Barrett comments that the Pastorals scem to mention every heresy that comes to the author's mind and so are directed at no single, specific adversary adversaries to be largely indefinite and described in ways, contemporary paracnetic writings typically de- scribe rejected teachers, 6.1. 1 Timothy A growing number of scholars identify the adversaries of these letters individu- ally. Among types of opponents interpreters have proposed for 1 Timothy we find proto- rostics, libertines, elitists from within, some who hold a fully realized eschatology, Jewish Christians who keep the food laws of Judaism, and a circle of Toral-observing Jewish Chri tians who included the author of Revckation in i reconstructions of eatly ns who engage in rab- jore finds ththeir number, Interpreters have identified the opponents of 2 Timothy as Gnostics, proto- Gnostics and enthusiastic Paulinists with a real- ized eschatology, For Titus scholars have found proto-Gnosties, Judaizers and perhaps M cionites,* rival Jewish missionaries, and the same two types of law-observant Jewish Chi tians proposed for 1 Timothy. First Timothy, like the other Pastorals, yields litde specific information about its adversaries. lis primary concern is not to describe and op- pose some false teaching but to cneourage a particular type of behavior by placing it in ar lithesis with adifferenttype. Consistent with this purpose, its polemic is ruther stylized, drawing on stock accusations and denunciations, Still, some things are discernible about the saries, First, the author’s assertion in 1 ‘Timothy 16-7 that they want to be teachers of the kaw implies that they require more ‘Torah obser vance than 1 ‘Timothy does. This may be cor toborated by 1 Timothy 4:3, where we find that they demand abstinence from certain unspeci- fied foods. This food prohibition is usually taken to signify that these adversaries have 2m ascetic tendency, especially since it is combined with a proscription against marriage. But the marriage prohibition could be also associated with an expectation that the Parousia was near (sce Paul's commentsin I Cor’7) or any number of rationales, including some relationship be- tween prophecy and celibacy or the emancipi tion of women, Still, they may have had some ascetic tendency. Even if they diel, their food regulations probably originated with the food mn, since other passages allude t questions about the law. One of these is 1 'Timo- laws of Jud: thy 1:8.11, where 1 Timothy distinguishes be- tween proper and improper uses of the law. 1 Timothy 2:5-7 may include a passing defense of Paul's nission to Gentiles! and so intima vance of the Taw is an issue. 1 Timothy also accuses the adversari propagating myths, genealogies and old wives’ tales (1 Tim 1:34; 4:7-8). Modern interpreters have often used these characterizations to iden: tify these adversaries as Gnostics, But such aceu- sations were commonly employed as polemical device designed to disparage one’ adversaries, no matter what their teaching was. ‘That seems to be their function here, Even if these statements haye specific texchingsin view, there is no clear information about their con- lent, Not even the reference to their teaching as gnosis (knowledge*) in 1 ‘Timothy 6:20 is sufficient to attribute gnostic tendencies 10 these adversaries, for many groups used this language to designate their teachings in this period There is, then, insufficient evidence to con. nect the teachings of these adversaries with Gnostic or proto-Gnostic beliefs, They do advor cate adherence to more of the Taw than the urging of food and marriage prohibitions may indicate that they have some ascetic tendencies, 1 Timo- thy's co ho further information about them, 6.2. 2 Timothy. The adversaries of 2 Timothy identified by name and by problematic teaching in 2 Timothy 2:17-18; they are Hymenaeus and Philewus, and they claim that the resurrection® has already taken place 2 ‘Timothy 2:17-18 is probably a polemical se- casting of their teaching which makes itas une acceptable as possible to the readers, But it still shows that they advocate an eschatology which asserts that Christians now (or at least can participate) in blessings that the author believes are reserved for tie Parousia. Their teaching surely excludes a fiat resurrection but may not deny every sort of afterlife with God. Though some interpreters use this more fully realized eschatology to iden- tify these adversaries as Gnosties, this is not sufficient evidence of such a tendency. Notonly are there other bases for a more fully realized eschatology, but no other Gnostic teachings are opposed in this letter These oppon also identified ay the predicted eschatological false teachers (2 Tim 3:19). The licentiousness attributed to them in this role is again part of the stock pok against one’s adversaries and so is not to be taken at face value without corroborating ¢ dence. The function of this characterization is twofold in 2 Timothy: it makes hem odions to the readers, and it is a foil against whieh to describe and recommend the proper manner of life (e.g. 2 Tim 3:10-15). ‘The remaining 8 10 adversaries in 2 Timothy charge them only with engaging in worthlessand harm ful disputations (2 Tim 2:14-17, 28-26) an accu sation that fits nearly any adversary. 2 Timothy 1:15 may indicate that these teach: ers who advocated a more fully realized escha- author of 1 Timothy allows, Thei nmenis about these adversaries give us are articipau bodily #1