Michael Hölzer, "Wider den Leerstand. Die Tempelreinigung in Mt 21,12-16 als Raumkonflikt," 5-26
This article analyses the Matthean account of Jesus’ cleansing of the temple (Matt 21:12-16) against the backdrop of a Matthean concept of space. Aspects of spatial structures and specific meanings of spatial expressions (like city, synagogue and house) are brought to light by considering Matt 11:1-16:20; Matt 8-9 and Matt 10. Together with Matt 12:29.43-45 these texts provide the background for a new interpretation of Matt 21:12-16 with a special focus on the conflict over space.
Steffen Jöris, "The Pauline Reception of Creation in the Adam-Christ Typology of 1 Corinthians 15," 27-40
The Adam-Christ typology mentioned in 1 Cor 15:22, 45 presents a curious case for the reception of the biblical creation account (esp. Gen 2:7). This reception of the Genesis text reflects an actualised reading that requires a special hermeneutical understanding of scripture. It is acknowledged that Paul’s hermeneutical lens for reading scripture is Christology. By using 1 Cor 10:1-14 as a point of departure, it is possible to deconstruct Paul’s hermeneutical technique of interpreting scripture backwards in light of an existent Christ and picking up on relevant Corinthian terminology (e.g. πνεῦμα). This very technique is also essential for comprehending the Adam-Christ typology as an actualised reading of the biblical creation account in order to foster Paul’s argument for the existence of the resurrection of the dead.
Markus Lau, "„Theologisches Katastrophenmanagement“. Antike Deutungs- und Bewältigungsstrategien im Umfeld der Zerstörung des Jerusalemer Tempels 70 n. Chr. – ein Vergleich zwischen Flavius Josephus, Bell VI, 4 Esra und der Münzprägung Bar Kochbas," 41-62
This contribution examines the literary strategies of interpretation and coping offered by Jewish authors dealing with the destruction of the Jerusalem temple 70 AD. These strategies are interpreted against the backdrop of ancient strategies of coping with disasters in general. Josephus wants to save the absolute sovereignty of God and therefore interprets the destruction of the temple as a rightful punishment by God himself, who uses the Romans for his purpose. 4 Ezra realizes the same mechanism of punishment at work, but rather focuses on God’s will of salvation and his justice. However, 4 Ezra elaborates on this topic in view of the temple destruction of 587 BC, which hints to a possible interpretation of the catastrophic events of 70 AD. This literary trick demonstrates the present time as a phase of a divine test and as a time of the proving for Israel. However, Bar Kokhba degrades the temple destruction by use of the iconography of his coinage to a single episode within the concept of an ongoing history of salvation. He already anticipates the restitution of the temple by means of his coinage. It is not the past which serves as a backdrop for the interpretation of the destruction of the temple (like 4 Ezra or Josephus), but the future, which can be formed by God and the freedom fighters like Bar Kokhba himself. The literary strategies of interpretation and coping in face of the destruction of the temple given by Jews are more or less typical for ancient strategies coping with disasters.
Christoph Niemand, "„Getreu bist du, die Toten wieder zu beleben“ (Amidah 2). Der Auferweckungsglaube im rabbinischen Judentum," 63-96
In the Amidah or Eighteen Benedictions – a Jewish prayer going back to the earliest rabbinic times – God is eulogised as the one who revives the dead. The Mishna calls faith in resurrection as a feature of Jewish orthodoxy. The Talmud keeps records to the rabbinic discussions where in scripture, especially where in the Torah, one can find the doctrine of resurrection. This paper presents the most prominent rabbinic traditions speaking of resurrection. It analyses the exegetical patterns adopted by the rabbis in arguing the biblical grounds and identifies trust in God’s boundless power and steadfast fidelity (of covenant) as the theological rationale. This shows that the early rabbis shared a common argumentation with Jesus debating with the Sadducees (Mark 12:18-27 and parallels).
Romeo Popa, "Umkehr und Leiden. Christologische Kreativität und der Umgang der ersten Christen mit der Sünde," 97-128
During the later Christian generations the fight against sin and some aspects of the christological construction, as the atonement theology, are linked very closely. In the same time, the cross theology of Christian communities was used as creative answer to the more and more critical social conditions; imitating Jesus in suffering and being persecuted constituted an effective coping mechanism. Both cognitive accentuations of this constructed Christology – cleaning of sin and suffering – have an important model function within the community and in its relation with the social context. As small groups, the churches needed creative cognitive and behavioural solutions in order to cope with the sin inside of and the persecution outside of community. To argue for this close intertwining of Christology with ethical aspects and social reality I have chosen three later writings of the New Testament – 1 Peter, Hebrews, Revelation –, which contain clearly indications for tensions to their social environment.
Karl Matthias Schmidt, "Der Tanz der falschen Ester. Die narrative Funktion der Sandwichkompositionen in Mk 3,13-6,56," 129-170
There are three embedded stories in Mark 3:13-6:56 which, in spite of a parallel structure in Mark 3:13-8:26, have no counterpart in Mark 7:1-8:26. This surplus can be explained in way that the three stories, along with an additional scene, create narrative structures that express the special encounter between Jesus and Israel. If one takes the story of Herodʼ banquet as an adaption of the scandal surrounding Lucius Quinctius Flamininus, widely known at the time of the outgoing republic and the early empire, Herod, against the backdrop of the Book of Esther, evidently becomes the disavowed ruler and the counterpart to Jesus in the same manner that the reserve shown by the relatives of Jesus contrasts with the behaviour of the apostles.
Jarl Henning Ulrichsen, "Zum Gebrauch der Temporalkonjunktion ἕως (mit oder ohne ὅτου, οὗ, ἄν) im Neuen Testament mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Mt 14,22 / Mk 6,45; Mt 26,36 / Mk 14,32; Lk 17,8," 171-190
The main topic of this study is an examination of Matt 14.22; 26.36 / Mark 14.32; Luke 17.8. The crucial question is how to translate and understand the conjunction ἕως (with or without οὗ) in these passages. In commentaries, Bible translations, grammars and dictionaries the conjunction is sometimes translated „while“ and sometimes „until“. Several arguments show that only the latter translation is correct.