According to a widespread opinion the purpose of the Second Book of Maccabees is to emphasize the great importance of the temple. This is plausible to a certain extent if the summary of history is read togther with the two introductory letters. But those authors are right who consider the letters to be originally independent of each other and also of the abrigded version. The construction of the summary taken in itself reveals a soteriology which attributes an important part to the witness of faith for the history of salvation, especially when bloodshed is involved. With regard to this point the abrigded version and the first introductory letter harmonize. Both the summary and the work as a whole have therefore a soteriological orientation and stress the witness of faith as relevant for salvation.
The word a)po/stoloj in Heb 3,1 is seen as a reference to the risen Jesus in Heb 2,12 who has been “sent” by God to reveal God’s name as Moses was “sent” to
reveal God’s name. Since Heb 2,12 is an allusion to the Christian tôdâ known as the Eucharist, the parallel with the word a)rxiereu/j is appropriate. The risen Christ is the son who reveals his father to those who have faith-trust as Jesus had faithtrust in the face of death. This revelation of a piece with a central theological theme of the New Testament, and is an invitation to enter liturgically into the death of Jesus so as to enter into his relation of son with his father.
After offering a critical analysis of Moloney’s synthetical parallelism for John 2–4, this article argues for a chiastic structure of the Cana-to-Cana cycle which directs the reader from the visible signs (2,1-12+4,43-54) and physical properties of religion (2,13-22+4,1-42) to Jesus as the metaphysical agent of
God’s salvation and judgment (3,1-21+3,22-36). The new 'dematerialized' faith thereby subverts expectations of material restoration and reorients the believing eye not towards a sanctuary but towards the Son.
The phrase )ec e(no/j in Heb 2,11 is a standard crux. The article attempts to come to grips with it through a close reading of the text of Heb 2,8bc-18. This close reading leads to the conclusion that the 'one' mentioned in is the spiritual seed of Abraham composed of all those who, like Abraham exercise faith-trust in God in the face of death. But this spiritual seed of Abraham is modified by the faith-trust of Jesus brought to the perfection of his heavenly priesthood.
In the Letter of James the faithful are called upon to become “poets of the lovgou”, that is to say to pass from just hearing the divine word to putting it into action. But this expression does not insist upon the need to make the faith concretely real. It enters into relation with a vocabulary that evokes the energy which must inspire both the words and the actions or the contemplation of human beings and it above all alludes metaphorically, by reference to Greek literary art, to the aesthetic, in fact spiritual, dimension that Christian conduct must take on in order truly to realize itself as such.
The program of Act 1,8 is carried through by the Twelve only in Jerusalem, Samaria and the Mediterranean coast, — but not «till the end of the earth». Their witness, however, is prolonged by the Seven of Jerusalem, the Five of Syrian Antioch, and the Seven companions of Paul of Act 20,4. Surprisingly, for everyone of the four groups of witnesses, the author narrates then the witnessing of only two of them. The narrative lacuna, apparently intentional since it recurs four times, allows Luke to involve the reader in reconstructing the spread of the gospel in all the directions for the remaining ten twelfths.
This essay proposes to read Eph 1,23, as follows: the plh/rwma is Christ, the fullness of all God’s graces. And the participle plhroume/nou is a neuter passive, whose content is the actual blessing brought by God to its fullness in all the believers. Eph 1,23 can then be translated like this: «Christ is the fullness of what is fully accomplished in all the faithful».
This analysis of the plot and the narrative point of view in Mark 10,46-52 sheds some light on the function of this episode in relation to the characterization of Jesus and of the disciples in Mark. Bartimaeus appears as a model of both confessing Jesus as Messiah and following him on the way to the cross. The narrator describes in detail Bartimaeus’ behavior, but it is Jesus who approves of it and implicitly accepts the blind man’s actions and words as a correct manifestation of faith in him.
Did Jesus call his followers to believe in him? or did he merely call them to believe in God or in the contents of his teaching? This article examines the evidence found in the Synoptic Gospels and discusses its possible Christological implications in light of the Scriptures of Israel and the writings of Second Temple Judaism. If Jesus expected to be the object of his disciples’ faith, his expectation may be understood in light of his redefinition of messiahship. But he may also be seen to have placed himself in the role of God, who was the object of Israel’s faith in the Scriptures of Israel and in Second Temple Judaism.