| Manuscript Evidence for Ancient Writings Author Written Earliest Copy Time Span Caesar 100-44 B.C. 900 A.D. 1,000 yrs 427-347 B.C. 900 A.D. 1,200 yrs Thucydides 460-400 B.C. 900 A.D. 1,300 yrs Tacitus 100 A.D. 1100 A.D. 1,000 yrs Suetonius 75-160 A.D. 950 A.D. 800 yrs Homer (Iliad) 900 B.C. 400 B.C. 500 yrs New Testament 40-100 A.D. 125 A.D. 25-50 yrs 24,000 Thousands of early Christian writings and lexionaries (first and second century) cite verses from the New Testament. In fact, it is nearly possible to put together the entire New Testament just from early Christian writings. For example, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 A.D.) cites verses from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. The letters of Ignatius (dated 115 A.D.) were written to several churches in Asia Minor and cites verses from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. These letters indicate that the entire New Testament was written in the first century A.D. In addition, there is internal evidence for a first century date for the writing of the New Testament. The book of Acts ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial (Acts 28:30-31 It is likely that Luke wrote Acts during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that Acts and Luke were written within thirty years of ministry and death of Jesus. Another internal evidence is that there is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Although Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus " prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation (Matthew 24:1-2 13:1-2 , Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32 no New Testament book refers to this event as having happened. If they had been written after 70 A.D., it is likely that letters written after 70 A.D. would have mentioned the fulfillment of Jesus " prophecy. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist, " In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D. " |
| Whatever their sources, writers would likely normally pay careful attention to how they arranged their material, especially given the importance of arrangement even in oral discourse. 55 Some ancient writers recommended connecting episodes to provide continuity, 56 a practice followed by Mark (cf. 1:14–39). Others like Polybius, however, allowed disjunctions in their narratives, although recognizing that some disagreed with their practice. 57 This may explain the breaks in John " s narrative, which is structured more chronologically (following Jerusalem festivals) than the Synoptics. 58 The basic plot of this Gospel includes increasing conflict, and its overarching structure moves from signs that reveal Jesus» identity (chs. 2–12) to instructions for his followers (chs. 13–17), the Passion Narrative (chs. 18–19), and resurrection appearances (chs. 20–21). Instead of strictly linear plot development, however, Johns plot often advances through the agency of repetition. 59 Once a writer had completed such a public work, he (in most cases the writer was «he») would «publish» it, that is, make it available to its intended readership. 60 Typically this process would begin through public readings. The well-to-do would have readings as entertainment following dinner at banquets, but the Gospels would be read in gatherings of believers in homes. 61 Readers of means who liked a work would then have copies made for themselves, preserving and further circulating the work. 62 Ancient as well as modern readers recognized the value of rereading a document or speech as often as necessary to catch the main themes and subtleties (Quintilian 10.1.20–21), but given the limited copies of the Gospel available and the general level of public literacy, 63 much of John " s audience may have depended on public readings. The Gospels seem to conform to the standards of length appropriate to the scrolls on which they were written, which supports the likelihood that their authors intended them to be published. By some estimates, Luke and Acts are roughly the same length; Matthew is within 1 percent of the length of either; John is within 1 percent of three-quarters this length and Mark is close to half. 64 As Metzger notes, a normal Greek literary roll rarely exceeds thirty-five feet, but «the two longest books in the NT–the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts–would each have filled an ordinary papyrus roll of 31 or 32 feet in length. Doubtless this is one of the reasons why Luke-Acts was issued in two volumes instead of one.» 65 Scrolls were not always completely filled, sometimes having a blank space at the end, 66 but the Gospels seem to have used all their space as wisely as possible; Matthew may condense and Luke expand at the end. (Likewise, Josephus seems to have been forced to end suddenly his first scroll of what is now called Against Apion, having run out of space; Ag. Ap. 1.320.) 67 |
| Tüb., 1919; Schmidt K. L. Der Rahmen der Geschichte Jesu: Literarkritische Untersuchungen zur ältesten Jesusüberlieferung. B., 1919; Bousset W. Kyrios Christos: Geschichte des Christusglaubens von den Anfängen des Christentums bis Irenaeus. Gött., 19212; Bultmann R. Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition. Gött., 1921; idem. Theologie des NT. Tüb., 1948; Dodd Ch. H. The Framework of the Gospel Narrative//The Expository Times. Edinb., 1932. Vol. 43. P. 396-400; Idem.// Idem. NT Studies. Manchester, 1953. P. 1-11; Holmes B. T. Luke " s Description of John Mark//JBL. 1935. Vol. 54. N 2. P. 63-72; Lightfoot R. H. Locality and Doctrine in the Gospels. L., 1938; Taylor V. The Gospel according to St. Mark. L., 1952; Parker P. The Gospel before Mark. Chicago, 1953; Riesenfeld H. Tradition und Redaktion im Markusevangelium//Neutestamentliche Studien für R. Bultmann zu seinem 70. Geburtstag/Hrsg. W. Eltester. B., 1954. S. 157-164 (англ. пер.: idem. On the Composition of the Gospel of Mark// Idem. The Gospel Tradition. Phil., 1970. P. 51-74); Marxsen W. Der Evangelist Markus: Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte des Evangeliums. Gött., 1956; Schreiber J. Die Christologie des Markusevangeliums//ZTK. 1961. Bd. 58. S. 154-183; Bruns J. E. John Mark: A Riddle within the Johannine Enigma//Scripture. L. etc., 1963. Vol. 15. N 31. P. 88-92; idem. The Confusion between John and John Mark in Antiquity//Ibid. 1965. Vol. 17. N 37. P. 23-26; Hahn F. Christologische Hoheitstitel: Ihre Geschichte im frühen Christentum. Gött., 1963; Vielhauer Ph. Erwägungen zur Christologie des Markusevangeliums//Zeit und Geschichte: Dankesgabe an R. Bultmann. Tüb., 1964. S. 155-169; Brandon S. G. F. Jesus and the Zealots: A Study of the Political Factor in Primitive Christianity. Manchester, 1967; Lohmeyer E. Das Evangelium des Markus. Gött., 196717; Vermès G. The Use of bar nash/bar nasha in Jewish Aramaic// Black M. An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts. Oxf., 19673. P. 310-328; idem. Jesus the Jew: A Historian " s Reading of the Gospels. |
| Davids P. H. The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude. Grand Rapids; Cambridge, 2006. Dunn J. Jesus, Paul, and the Law: Studies in Mark and Galatians. Louisville, 1990. Dunn J. The Acts of the Apostles. Valley Forge, PA, 1996. Ghetti A. B. M., Ferrua A., Josi E., Kirschbaum E. Esplorazioni sotto la confessione di San Pietro in Vaticano. Citta del Vaticano, 1951. 2 Bde. Fitzmyer J. A. The Gospel according to Luke (I–IX). Introduction, Translation and Notes. New York, 1981. Frey J. The Epistle of Jude between Judaism and Hellenism//The Catholic Epistles and Apostolic Tradition: A New Perspective on James to Jude. Ed. K.-W. Niebuhr, R. W. Wall. Waco, Texas, 2009. P. 109–329, 463–475. Fung R. Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids; Cambridge, 1988. Gaventa B. R. The Acts of the Apostles. Nashville, 2003. George T. Galatians. Nashville, Tennessee, 1994. Goppelt L. A Commentary on 1 Peter. Grand Rapids, 1993. Green M. 2 Peter and Jude. Revised edition. Grand Rapids, 1994. Green M. 2 Peter Reconsidered. London, 1960. Grundmann W. Der Brief des Judas und der zweite Brief des Petrus. Berlin, 1974. Guarducci M. La tomba di San Pietro. Una straordinaria vicenda. Milano, 2000. Harink D. 1 and 2 Peter. Grand Rapids, 2009. Harvey R., Towner Ph. H. 2 Peter and Jude. Downers Grove, 2009. Heil J. P. The Transfiguration of Jesus: Narrative Meaning and Function of Mark 9:2–8 , Matt 17:1–8 and Luke 9:28–36. Roma, 2009. Hemer C. J., Gempf C. H. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Winona Lake, 1990. Holladay C. R. Acts: A Commentary. Louisville, Kentucky, 2016. Holladay C. R. Introduction to the New Testament. Reference Edition. Waco, Texas, 2017. Hultgren A. J. The Parables of Jesus. A Commentary. Grand Rapids, 2002. Jewett R. A Chronology of Paul’s Life. Philadelphia, 1979. Johnson L. T. The Acts of the Apostles. Collegeville, Minnesota, 1992. Jones I. H. The Matthean Parables. A Literary and Historical Commentary. Leiden; New York; Köln, 1995. Keener C. S. The Gospel of John. A Commentary. Vol. 1–2. Peabody, 2010. |
| 10833 But both kinds of appearances appear early in the tradition; it made little sense to invent Galilean appearances despite Mark " s favoritism toward Galilee, and it is difficult to account for Lukés certitude in Acts without a Judean apostolate, despite his theological use of Jerusalem. Sanders may be right that when Lukés Jerusalem center for Luke-Acts is taken into account, the most plausible scenario is that the disciples «fled to Galilee and then returned to Jerusalem,» 10834 where Galileans often traveled. 2. Pre- or Postresurrection Tradition? Many think that John 21 recycles the same tradition as behind Luke 5:1–11. 10835 One could view John 21 as an allusion to Peter " s first encounter with Jesus, but given the form of that encounter only in Luke, this proposal may expect too much knowledge of Lukan tradition from John " s audience. In any case, a direct literary relationship between Luke 5:1–11 and John 21:5–8 is improbable; the only two significant words shared by both are ιχθς and δκτυον. 10836 Redaction in the chapter need not, of course, deny the possibility of genuine historical tradition here; 10837 one could even argue that the similarities point merely to consistency in the tradition rather than to two distinct events. But as throughout the Gospel, historical tradition is difficult to test in the absence of material parallel with the Synoptics. Fish symbols were common in Diaspora Judaism and contemporary paganism, 10838 but such symbolism is improbable here. Others also think that OT imagery stands behind the Gospel accounts of the calling of fishermen or (more commonly) at least behind Jesus» Markan summons to become «fishers of people» ( Mark 1:17 ; Hab 1:15; Jer 16:16 ; cf. Ezek 47:10 ). 10839 But the OT use is a judgment metaphor (Jos. Asen. 21MSS would be closer), so the image is questionable unless Jesus provocatively pictured those who should «trap» people for the kingdom 10840 or intended the allusion by way of contrast. 10841 Derrett, who thinks Ezek 47 stands behind both the Synoptic fishing calls and John 21:5–6 , appeals to the early Jewish use of fish symbolism to represent individual salvation, 10842 but John 21 , at least, provides no clues that support this interpretation. |
| 77 E.g., Lucian Hist. 12, who distinguishes proper biography from falsification and flattery; Plutarch in Poetry! (Mor. 16F) points to fabricated materials in poetry (quite different from his description of his sources in the Lives). See Mosley, «Reporting,» 26; Kany, «Bericht»; Witherington, Acts, 25–26; cf. Aune, Environment, 79 (who both notes the distinction and recognizes some overlap). 78 Most Greek tragedies reflected and developed earlier tradition; thus in Helen Euripides follows the Recantation of Stesichorus (which violates the natural reading of Homer), yet to harmonize with Homer must have Menelaus and Helen meet in Egypt and return to Sparta in time for Telemachus " s arrival in the Odyssey. But such constraints were much more general than with historical works (cf. how closely Matthew or Luke follows Mark). 79 Talbert, «Acts,» 72. Pseudo-Callisthenes mixes both historical and fictitious sources, plus adds his own fictions (e.g., Alex. 1.23), 450–750 years after the supposed events. Bowersock " s examples of fictitionalized history (Fiction as History 21) are also distinctly novelistic. 81 See, e.g., Aune, Environment, 151–53; Bauckham, «Acts of Paul»; Keylock, «Distinctness,» 210. One may compare works such as the Acts of Paul and Thecla or Acts of John 53–64,73–80, where elements of the romance story line are followed, except that the women become devotees of the male teacher in chastty, devoted not to sexual love but to God " s word. 82 Some scholars have suggested some overlap in the Gospels, though acknowledging that the degree varies from Gospel to Gospel (e.g., Freyne, Galilee, 11). 86 See Kee, Miracle, 193, for other propagandists narratives in the Isis cult. It is hardly true, however, that the genre as a whole was centered on religious propaganda (Kee, Miracle, 193–94). For more Isis aretalogies see Horsley, Documents, 1:10–21. 87 Dio Cassius 1.1.1–2; Fornara, Nature of History, 120–33; Palmer, «Monograph,» 3, 29, citing, e.g., Cicero Fam. 5.12.5; Polybius 1.4.11; 3.31.13; cf. also Dionysius of Halicarnassus Demosth. 47. Bur-ridge, Gospeb, 149–51, includes entertainment among the function of many biographies; and, p. 245, complains that most of Pervós criteria for identifying novels are so broad they apply to most historical works as well; cf. Porter, « " Wé Passages,» 551–52. Some fiction did occur at times in ancient biography (Chance, «Fiction»), especially when the subject had lived centuries earlier (Lefkowitz, Africa, 82). |
| LXVII. Saint Artemas (October 30) In the Epistle to Titus, Saint Paul writes, I shall send Artemas unto thee. Artemas was Bishop of Lystra. LXVIII. Saint Aquila (July 14) Saint Aquila is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles and by Paul. He was Bishop of Heraclea, preached the word of God in Asia Minor and Achaia, and was killed by unbelievers. LXIX. Saint Fortunatus (June 15) Fortunatus is mentioned by Saint Paul in his First Epistle to the Corinthians. After laboring greatly in preaching the word of God, he reposed in the Lord. LXX. Saint Achaicus Saint Paul refers to Achaicus and Fortunatus in the same passage, saying, I am glad of the coming of Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied. For they have refreshed my spirit, and yours. Two additional apostles are sometimes numbered with the Seventy, bringing the total to seventy-two, the number mentioned in the variant reading of the Gospel, according to which the Lord appeared unto the other seventy-two. St. Dionysius the Areopagite. Hosios Loukas Monastery, Boeotia, Greece LXXI. Saint Dionysius the Areopagite (October 3) Saint Dionysius appears in the Acts of the Apostles, was Bishop of Athens, and later proclaimed Christ in Gaul where he was beheaded. Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea of Palestine, explains that " Dionysius the Areopagite, converted by Paul’s preaching in Athens (according to Luke’s testimony in the Acts of the Apostles), became a member of the apostolic choir. " LXXII. Saint Simeon Niger This saint is also mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles by Luke, who writes, Now there were in the church that was at Antioch, certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon, that was called Niger. We are assured by Saint Epiphanias that this Simeon was an apostle. The great hierarch of Cyprus writes, " Mark, Luke, Justus, Barnabas, Apelles, Rufus, and Niger are all among the seventy-two apostles. " Troparion, Tone 3 Holy apostles of the Seventy,/entreat the merciful God/to grant our souls forgiveness of transgressions. |
| B. Cancik. Tüb., 1984. S. 85-113. (WUNT; 33); idem. Bios und Logos: Formgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Lukians «Demonax»//Ibid. S. 115-130; Dormeyer D., Frankem ö lle H. Evangelium als literarische Gattung und als theologischer Begriff: Tendenzen und Aufgaben der Evangelienforschung in 20. Jh., mit einer Untersuch. des Markusevangeliums in seinem Verhältnis zur antiken Biographie//ANRW. R. 2. 1984. Bd. 25. H. 2. S. 1543-1705; Neusner J. In Search of Talmudic Biography: The Problem of the Attributed Saying. Chico (Calif.), 1984; Reiser M. Der Alexanderroman und das Markusevangelium//Markus-Philologie. 1984. S. 131-163; idem. Die Stellung der Evangelien in der antiken Literaturgeschichte//ZNW. 1999. Bd. 90. H. 1/2. S. 1-27; Dormeyer D. Evangelium als literarische und theologische Gattung. Darmstadt, 1989; idem. Das NT im Rahmen der antiken Literaturgeschichte. Darmstadt, 1993; idem. Das Markusevangelium als Idealbiographie von Jesus Christus dem Nazarener. Stuttg., 1999; Mack B. L., Robbins V. K. Patterns of Persuasion in the Gospels. Sonoma (Calif.), 1989; Tolbert M. A. Sowing the Gospel. Minneapolis, 1989; eadem. The Gospels in Greco-Roman Culture//The Book and the Text: The Bible and Literary Theory/Ed. R. Schwartz. Oxf., 1990. P. 258-275; McArthur H. K., Johnston R. M. They Also Taught in Parables: Rabbinic Parables from the First Centuries of the Christian Era. Grand Rapids, 1990; Perrot Ch. The Reading of the Bible in the Ancient Synagogue//Mikra/Ed. M. J. Mulder. Minneapolis, 1990. P. 137-159; Stuhlmacher P. The Genre(s) of the Gospels: Response to P. L. Shuler//The Interrelations of the Gospels/Ed. D. L. Dungan. Leuven, 1990. P. 484-494; Sterling G. E. Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke-Acts, and Apologetic Historiography. Leiden, 1992. (Suppl. to NT; 64); Alexander L. C. A. The Preface to Luke " s Gospel: Literary Convention and Social Context in Luke 1. 1-4 and Acts 1. 1. Camb., 1993. (SNTS.MS; 78); Smith S. H. A Divine Tragedy: Some Observations on the Dramatic Structure of Mark " s Gospel//NTIQ. |
| Apostle and Evangelist Matthew Commemorated on November 16 The Holy Apostle and Evangelist Matthew, was also named Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27); he was one of the Twelve Apostles (Mark 3:18; Luke 6:45; Acts 1:13), and was brother of the Apostle James Alphaeus (Mark 2:14). He was a publican, or tax-collector for Rome, in a time when the Jews were under the rule of the Roman Empire. He lived in the Galilean city of Capernaum. When Matthew heard the voice of Jesus Christ: “Come, follow Me” (Mt. 9:9), left everything and followed the Savior. Christ and His disciples did not refuse Matthew’s invitation and they visited his house, where they shared table with the publican’s friends and acquaintances. Like the host, they were also publicans and known sinners. This event disturbed the pharisees and scribes a great deal. Publicans who collected taxes from their countrymen did this with great profit for themselves. Usually greedy and cruel people, the Jews considered them pernicious betrayers of their country and religion. The word “publican” for the Jews had the connotation of “public sinner” and “idol-worshipper.” To even speak with a tax-collector was considered a sin, and to associate with one was defilement. But the Jewish teachers were not able to comprehend that the Lord had “come to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Mt. 9:13). Matthew, acknowledging his sinfulness, repaid fourfold anyone he had cheated, and he distributed his remaining possessions to the poor, and he followed after Christ with the other apostles. St Matthew was attentive to the instructions of the Divine Teacher, he beheld His innumerable miracles, he went together with the Twelve Apostles preaching to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt. 10:6). He was a witness to the suffering, death, and Resurrection of the Savior, and of His glorious Ascension into Heaven. Having received the grace of the Holy Spirit, which descended upon the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, St Matthew preached in Palestine for several years. At the request of the Jewish converts at Jerusalem, the holy Apostle Matthew wrote his Gospel describing the earthly life of the Savior, before leaving to preach the Gospel in faraway lands. |
| Luke 3for a fuller citation). 3868 See esp. Stendahl, School, 48, on the Synoptic dependence on the LXX here. A minor divergence from the LXX may have christological implications (see Leaney, Luke, 106); Lukés extension of the quotation is also significant (Wilson, Gentiles, 38). 3869 Higgins, Historicity, 76 (citing also Zech 9in John 12:15 , vs. in Matt 21:5; Isa 6in John 12:40 , vs. in Matt 13:14–15; Acts 28:25–27; Mark 4:12 ; Luke 8:10). But contrast Menken, «Quotation,» who thinks that John " s quotation does reflect a Septuagintal form. 3870 See Freed, Quotations. Schuchard, Scripture, 1–15, however, argues that John " s translation of Isa 40here comes from the old Greek (roughly, the LXX). 3871 See the brief discussion in the introduction, ch. 1, pp. 40–42; Smith, Among Gospeh, 195–241. 3872 E.g., Robinson, Studies, 13. 3873 1QS 8.13–14; cf. 4Q176 1–2 1.4–9; cf. also Brownlee, «Comparison,» 71; Brown, «Scrolls,» 4. They applied it especially to their knowledge of the law (1QS 8.15–16). 3874 1QS 8.13–14; 9.19–20; Scobie, «John,» 68. Even with crowds visiting, however, the wilderness remained a place of social isolation (cf. the Stoic claim in Cicero Fin. 3.20.65). 3875 Bruce, «Qumrân,» 177. Yet the Qumran sect could also take «wilderness» figuratively, and clearly understood the promise of a new exodus in the biblical prophets; cf. 1QM 1.2–3 and comments in Yadin, War Scroll, 257. 3876 Snodgrass, «Streams.» 3877 Cf., e.g., Mauser, Wilderness, 55–60. Mark " s explicit mention of the Jordan (1:4) reinforces the image of the new exodus for his readers (Kingsbury, Christology, 59; Rhoads and Michie, Mark, 65; Kee, Community, 88). 3878 Theissen, Sociology, 48–50, lists especially Essenes and Zealots; cf. also Pesiq. Rab. 15:14/15 (probably third-century tradition). 3879 Josephus Ant. 20.189; War 2.259,261–262 (some of these «false prophets» may have also ventured messianic claims, which we would expect Josephus to suppress rather than recount). 3880 Cf. Num. Rab. 11:2; Song Rab. |
|
|
