Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry
  • Home
  • Calendar
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Recording Archives
  • Resources
    • Bible Study - John's Gospel
    • Bible Study - Ephesians
    • Greek Tutorials
  • About
    • About Wittenberg CoMo
    • Support Us
    • Contact Us
  • Position Papers
  • Sandbox

Sources for Didache 1.3b-2.1

9/22/2023

0 Comments

 
9/22/23
Scholarly Reflections
Kloppenborg, John S. "Chapter Six: The Use of the Synoptics or Q in Did. 1:3b-2:1." in Van de Sandt, Huub (editor). Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005, 105-129.

Kloppenborg observes that recent scholarship has moved from considering the Didache dependent on canonical texts to its independence (Kloppenborg 2005, 106). Upon comparison with various other early Christian church orders, Kloppenborg considers Didache 1:3b-2:1 to be of great importance, as numerous texts present the greater context of the Two Ways material, but only some include 1:3b-2:1 (Kloppenborg 2005, 107). The discussion of dependence and its direction is complicated, and has led various scholars to even contradictory conclusions (Kloppenborg 2005, 108-109).

At issue in interpretation is not the fact that there are differences between the Didache and the Synoptic texts, but evaluation of the significance of those differences (Kloppenborg 2005, 110). In Kloppenborg's view, this discussion is made more challenging if the Synoptic texts were fluid in nature for some time before arriving at a final form. Not only the fact that a text could change, but also the fact that the Didache tends to make allusions rather than quotations causes difficulties (Kloppenborg 2005, 111). It is very difficult to identify the definitive source of an allusion. Kloppenborg suggests the most fruitful way of evaluating the dependence would be to identify areas where the Didache specifically uses material which must by its nature have been revised by a redactor (Kloppenborg 2005, 112).

Didache 1:3b-2:1 may be of importance as we consider the relationship between the Didache and Matthew's Gospel (Kloppenborg 2005, 113). In this passage, Kloppenborg considers the material related to Matthew to be heavily reworked. The material, compared with the statement of Jesus included in Matthew, has been expanded. This has suggested to some, including Koester, to assign it to the work of a different redactor than other parts of the Didache (Kloppenborg 2005, 114). While Kloppenborg recognizes that the critical edition of a reconstruction of Q is a hypothetical document, he also observes that it was prepared without reference to the Didache (Kloppenborg 2005, 115). The passage, however, does line up with material in the Q edition. The admonition to pray for enemies occurs both in Q and in Didache 1:3b. Kloppenborg finds developments in the Didache when comparing it to the material he sees as a common source for Luke and Q (Kloppenborg 2005, 120). However, in his subsequent discussion he doesn't find entirely conclusive evidence for the way dependence or wording may be confirmed. The purpose of prayer for enemies in Didache 1:3b is to win them over. This differs from many of the New Testament passages, where there may be a motive of gaining God's favor (Kloppenborg 2005, 123). The clearest evidence Kloppenborg finds of a reference specifically to Matthew rather than Q or Luke is the statement of the "right" cheek in Didache 1:6. Here, though, many commentators take Matthew to be dependent on the Didache, which may further complicate the situation (Kloppenborg 2005, 124). The remaining possible piece of evidence is a command to give freely, even in the case of a request for a theft of garments (Kloppenborg 2005, 126). Here the Didache and Luke are more similar, while Matthew deviates.

Kloppenborg concludes that there is no concrete evidence for the Didache's dependence on a specific source, whether Matthew, Luke, or Q. It has significant differences from other works (Kloppenborg 2005, 129). The compiler may well have known Luke, and possibly knew Matthew and Q, but we cannot be entirely certain.
0 Comments

Sermon on the Mount and Two Ways

9/21/2023

0 Comments

 
9/21/23
Scholarly Reflections
Syreeni, Kari. "Chapter Five: The Sermon on the Mount and the Two Ways Teaching of the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub (editor). Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005, 87-103.

Syreeni takes the Two Ways portion of Didache 1-6 to be significantly similar to the Sermon on the Mount of Matthew 5-7 (Syreeni 2005, 87). However, when evaluated in terms of catechetical object, composition history, and possible source material, they are not very similar. So as to work toward a possible history of development, Syreeni begins with the Didache, which he assumes to presuppose Matthew, then looks to earlier stages.

The Didache contains both a catechetical section and a section we would take as a church order. Syreeni considers both to have been adapted as they were pulled into a collection of materials (Syreeni 2005, 88). The various segments may rightly be understood as fitting into different genres. Syreeni also views the sections of the Didache as self-consciously not exhaustive. They do not provide everything that might be taught before baptism or all one would need in terms of community practices (Syreeni 2005, 89). They point out essential principles.

Syreeni reviews the materials within Diache 1-6, noting that the conceptual framework is similar at some points to material in the Epistle of Barnabas, and that the concepts stress boundaries between Christianity and paganism, rather than between Christianity and Judaism (Syreeni 2005, 91). Due to the relative clumsiness of Barnabas, Syreeni considers the Two Ways materials in the Didache to be based on Baranabas, rather than the opposite flow of influence (Syreeni 2005, 92). It is further possible that both Barnabas and the Didache drew on a common source. Syreeni does think there is something which underlies Barnabas, though he does not pursue it in this chapter (Syreeni 2005, 93).

Syreeni notes that the Didache has particular ways of dealing with moral exhortation. Specifically, prohibitions are drawn from the second part of the decalogue. Leviticus 19:18 is present, and there is an address to "my child" (Syreeni 2005, 94). These uncercurrents in gathering commands could lead both to the distillation of Torah in James and also to the Sermon on the Mount. Syreeni is clear that this is not a necessary outcome but that it is certainly a possible one (Syreeni 2005, 96).

Next, Syreeni considers the compositional history of Matthew 5-7, which he takes to be clearly based on Q 6:20b-49, as informed by his two source theory (Syreeni 2005, 97). The intent of Matthew is to produce a gospel based on narrative and discourses, while the Didache is identified as a paraneitic set of instructions (Syreeni 2005, 98). The Sermon on the Mount is an example of what Jesus, in 28:19, would refer to as what he commanded his disciples. Syreeni takes the Sermon on the Plain in Luke to be constructed from the same Q material. Though Q is a hypothetical document, Syreeni notes that it also has a debated history of composition. He summarizes that the passage is a composite of several groups of sayings (Syreeni 2005, 99). Logically, he finds ties to the structure of the Didache, with an early emphasis on discipleship, further moral teacings, and eschatology toward the end. The redaction which could lead to Matthew 5-7 shows marks of oral enhancement and reorganization of ideas in order to strengthen its impact (Syreeni 2005, 100). Syreeni does not consider it conclusive either that Matthew 5-7 shows the work of a community or of an individual redactor (Syreeni 2005, 101).

Syreeni concludes that while Matthew knew of Two Ways teachings, the Sermon on the Mount was not directly influenced by them. However, both Matthew 5-7 and Didache 1-6 set out to teach essentials of the Christian faith, using Jewish patterns, and taking fairly similar structural paths (Syreeni 2005, 102).
0 Comments

The Didache's Audience

9/20/2023

0 Comments

 
9/20/23
Scholarly Reflections
Milavec, Aaron. "Chapter Four: When, Why, and for Whom Was the Didache Created? Insights into the Social and Historical Setting of the Didache Communities." in Van de Sandt, Huub (editor). Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005, 63-84.

Milavec observes that his view of the Didache evolved in the period since about 1990. He sees more of an "intentional unity" in the text than he had before. He also finds less reason to take the Didache as dependent on a canonical gospel than he had previously (Milavec 2005, 63). The oral character suggests a teaching which would have been stable for some time in an oral form. For this reason, the rigidity of textual studies based on literary dependence seem out of place in regards to the Didache (Milavec 2005, 64).

Milavec's studies of orality moved him to memorize the work as an oral "performance piece." He reports being surprised at the ease with which he did so, as well as the grasp he gained of the overall logic and organization of the Didache (Milavec 2005, 65). He finds it to be a fruitful piece of teaching with a strong pastoral concern for transforming the lives of its hearers.

Milavec takes the "Way of Life" in the Didache as a signal of the training a master would provide for his apprentices (Milavec 2005, 66). He emphasizes that the apprenticeship process is a lengthy type of learning, not only information but life values. In the Didache the mentor is speaking from God, so is to be accepted with a certain reverence (Didache 4.1) (Milavec 2005, 67). The mentoring was quite possibly individual in nature. Milavec notes the use of the second person singular to address the disciple (Milavec 2005, 68). One would expect that men would teach men and women would teach women. Milavec considers the relatively nonsexist language (addresses to "child" rather than "son," for instance) to indicate that it was expected that both men and women would be disciples (Milavec 2005, 69).

Milavec moves on to walk through several topics of the Didache, describing the logical order and connections. It is of primary importance that a convert pray for his enemies expecting that there will be opposition to conversion. The convert's family and friends may, in this way, become at enmity (Milavec 2005, 70). It is important to pray for those people and seek peace despite the conflict.

The Didache speaks of giving first in 1:4-5, then in 4:5-8. While at first, the novice is to give freely, Milavec sees this as an initial surrender upon conversion. Later, in chapter four, he sees an ongoing sharing in the community (Milavec 2005, 71). Milavec notes that a Roman attitude toward private property would normally take no concern for sharing with the poor. The giving in the Didache cares for the poor while making no attempt at self-promotion (Milavec 2005, 72).

Milavec next observes that the training presents prohibitions first, then positive virtues, and that this is done in progressive layers, dealing with the simplest directives before increasing difficulty (Milavec 2005, 72). The program is thus organized for the greatest success. The most difficult conflict resolution situations are reserved for the end of the teaching, in chapters 14 and 15 (Milavec 2005, 73).

Obedience to the Jewish Law is a matter of important discussion as regards the Didache. Milavec notes that both Flusser and Draper, seemingly independently, concluded that converts would be expected to adhere to the Torah as much as possible (Milavec 2005, 73). Milavec, however, takes Didache 4:13 to exhort obedience to the teaching of the Didache, rather than the Torah (Milavec 2005, 74). Though strong demands are made, Milavec observes flexibility, but not in the standard. "When it comes to achieving these things, however, allowance is made for failure and for gradualism" (Milavec 2005, 75). Confession of failings moves people to shame and urges them to diligence in correcting the failings.

Milavec understands a prohibition against food sacrificed to idols to have been placed very shortly before the time of baptism because family meals and celebrations in pagan circles would routinely involve an offering to a deity. To avoid this would be virtually impossible in society before being welcomed, as Milavec sees it, to the communal Christian meals. Therefore, the prohibition is delayed until the immediate pre-baptismal period (Milavec 2005, 76). After the fast, during which any nourishment which had been sacrificed to idols was expelled from the body, the convert and others would fast, in solidarity with one another (Milavec 2005, 77). The eucharistic meal would then be received. Milavec observes that while Didache 9-10 speaks of eucharist, so does chapter 14. After surveying disparate views of the reason, he concludes that while the eucharist is in essence the same, the earlier context is that of baptism and the later version is what regularly occurred in the life of the congregation (Milavec 2005, 79).

Milavec observes that the Didache and Matthew's Gospel both deal with many similar situations (Milavec 2005, 80). This is common to Christianity. When dealing with instance of sin, he sees the two texts as taking different approaches. The Didache has a culture of confessing, with a shunning of members who will not change their ways (14:1, 15:3). Matthew sees the offending member as confronted with a need for repentance numerous times before any sort of shunning (Matt. 18:15-18). Milavec sees the model in Matthew, which bears Jesus' endorsement, as persuasive enough that the Didache community would have certainly adopted it if they had been aware of Matthew (Milavec 2005, 81).

Milavec briefly surveys opinions about provenance and date of the Didache (Milavec 2005, 81-83). He concludes that the Didache was composed with no awareness of the canonical gospels, thus probably at an early date.
0 Comments

Matthew, Didache, and Ignatius of Antioch

9/18/2023

0 Comments

 
9/18/23
Scholarly Reflections

Jefford, Clayton N. "Chapter Two: The Milieu of Matthew, the Didache, and Ignatius of Antioch: Agreements and Differences." in Van de Sandt, Huub (editor). Matthew and the Didache: Two Documents from the Same Jewish-Christian Milieu? Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005, 35-47.

Jefford holds a position that Matthew, the Didache, and the genuine letters of Ignatius all have an Antiochian provenance, though he admits that the evidence for Antioch is tenuous for Matthew and the Didache (Jefford 2005, 36).The texts show signs of access to the same underlying resources, and Ignatius, though he doesn't use Matthew extensively, seems more influenced by Matthew than by the other canonical gospels. While the evidence remains tenuous, Jefford thinks one can make a reasoned conclusion that the same community exercised a strong ifnluence on the three works.

Jefford briefly considers arguments for Egypt as the provenance, observing all are inconclusive (Jefford 2005, 37). British scholarship has historically suggested Palestine as the provenance for the Didache. However, recent scholarship has tended to move at least the final stages of development of the Didache "away from Palestine toward Syria" (Jefford 2005, 38). He also finds some strength in arguments that Matthew may reflect a Syrian context.

The work of Jonathan Draper has recently made some credible suggestions that the Didache depends on a Q tradition which may have accumulated material as the community moved from Palestine to Syria (Jefford 2005, 39). Jefford considers Matthew to show many signs of influence from a Q community as well. The interplay of an established community and influences from outside the community is, in his opinion, an important similarity between Matthew and the Didache. The similarity in concepts but not in wording suggests dependence on similar oral sources, rather than a written source (Jefford 2005, 40). A challenge with this interpretation is presented by the actual use of the materials. Jefford observes that the same idea may be presented in very different contexts in Matthew and the Didache (Jefford 2005, 41). This could easily be taken to show the two texts have different provenance. Yet Jefford takes it as evidence that different authors applied the relevant ideas to different situations.

Jefford reminds his readers that we understand there to be, by necessity, a Jewish background to early Christianity. The influence of Paul was significant to the development of Christianity as well (Jefford 2005, 42). While Pauline theology is not clear in the Didache, we can see that Paul attests to communities in which there are elements both of Jewish and non-Jewish Chrsitianity. We know tha Antioch had both elements, as evidenced by remains in Antioch and by Acts 15 and Galatians 2 (Jefford 2005, 42). The Pauline influence in Antioch is clear, particularly as we consider the concerns which Ignatius shares in his letters (Jefford 2005, 43). Jefford notes the emphasis on heirarchy in Ignatius. Later bishops also show signs of dealing with Jewish factions in Christianity. This suggests there were Pauline and Petrine emphases in the same city.

Jefford considers it important to his inquiry that we attempt to identify the gospel text (or texts) which Ignatius would have taken as authoritative. This is a challenge, since Ignatius only clearly uses a handful of Old Testament writings (Jefford 2005, 44). There are no appeals to Mark, and only perhaps one allusion to Luke. While Jefford finds evidence of John's world of thought there are no quotations. Pauline interpretation seems clear. And the scholarly community largely agrees that Ignatius not only knew and used Matthew, but that he expected his readers to know Matthew as well (Jefford 2005, 45). Jefford therefore concludes that Antioch is a likely provenance for Matthew, and that the apparent parallels in the contexts of Matthew and the Didache suggest the same provenance for the Diache (Jefford 2005, 46). The confluence of evidence suggests to Jefford that Antioch is the most likely large city to serve, primarily due to the fact that Ignatius is clearly associated with that community.
0 Comments

Matthew and the Didache

9/11/2023

0 Comments

 
9/11/23
Scholarly Observations

Van de Sandt, Huub. "Chapter Seven: Matthew and the Didache." in Sim, David C., and Repschinski, Boris (editors). Matthew and His Christian Contemporaries. London: T&T Clark, 2008, 123-138.

Van de Sandt recognizes a strong affinity between the Didache and Matthew's Gospel, detailing a number of the thematic similarities (Van de Sandt 2008, 123). Scholarly consensus in the past was that the Didache drew on the final form of Matthew and perhaps Luke. The line of thinking which places the Didache near the end of the first century suggests the influence of Matthew was strong at that time (Van de Sandt 2008, 124). The views which make Matthew dependent on the Didache, in Van de Sandt's opinion, push the dating of the Didache much earlier and possibly too early. However, dependence on a common tradition is quite plausible.

Both Matthew and the Didache use obedience to the principles of Torah (particularly commands to love your neighbor, fulfilling the second table of the commandments) as key to their moral code (Van de Sandt 2008, 125). The manner of interpretation is similar in each text. Van de Sandt evaluates this idea in greater depth by looking at the Didache's Two Ways section, as it provides a way of understanding matters considered those of life and death (Van de Sandt 2008, 127). The Way of Life is built on the foundation of love for neighbor. The Decalogue serves as the unifying principle for the Didache (Van de Sandt 2008, 129). Likewise, in Matthew 5, observance of righteousness is what brings perfection (Mt. 5:20-48) (Van de Sandt 2008, 130). The Didache also describes perfection in terms of obedience to commands of righteousness, first in non-retaliation (1:4) and then in obedience to all God's laws (6:2) (Van de Sandt 2008, 133).

Matthew and the Didache do not treat practical matters of carrying out the Law in the same way. Van de Sandt observes that Matthew calls for detailed observances of the Law in such a way as to go beyond the specific commands and reach for the intent or implications (Van de Sandt 2008, 135). The Didache does speak (6:2) of perfection through keeping the commandments. However, immediately afterward it relaxes the stance. This is the opposite of Matthew's view (Van de Sandt 2008, 137).

Van de Sandt concludes that both documents take Torah for granted and as a means of some sort of perfection (Van de Sandt 2008, 137-138). They have different ways of going about this quest for perfection, particularly in the case of addressing Gentiles. The Didache has a different standard. While Gentiles are to attempt to observe Torah, it is recognized as being a cultural departure for them. This is more akin to Paul's view that the law is good but not salvific.
0 Comments

Purity in Matthew, James, and the Didache

8/31/2023

0 Comments

 
8/31/23
Scholarly Reflections
Repschinski, Boris. "Chapter Seventeen: Purity in Matthew, James, and the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 379-395.

Repschinski observes that purity codes have existed within Judaism and many other cultures, and that they tended to provide a good deal of social cohesion (Repschinski 2008, 379). Within Israel, purity codes related to Torah assist in defining a means by which we can be holy as God is holy (Repschinski 2008, 380).

Matthew's Gospel presents the idea of purity in terms of Jesus' work to bring forgiveness of sins (Repschinski 2008, 381). Jesus is presented as the one whose baptism and forgiveness actually takes away sins. He is the one who cleanses the unrighteous from the temple and who asserts the temple as the place of God's presence (Repschinski 2008, 383). For this reason, when Jesus leaves the temple, it signals the departure of God's presence. Jesus' presence, in Matthew's Gospel, remains in the Last Supper as the Passover is re-enacted (Repschinski 2008, 384). This, again, is a rite of purification. Jesus serves as the replacement of the temple. Repschinski notes that Matthew signals the extent of Jesus' replacement of a purity code by describing Jesus' interactions with Gentiles who would not be accepted in the temple culture (Repschinski 2008, 385). Matthew's orientation is that Jesus is held as the contrast to those who would violate the principles and spirit of Torah (Repschinski 2008, 386).

James, in contrast to Matthew, does not pursue issues of purity to a great extent (Repschinski 2008, 388). Ritual purity is absent from James' argument, though there are references to drawing near to God (Repschinski 2008, 389). There are multiple statements indicating a need to be in community with one another and with God. These are often made through descriptive metaphors (Repschinski 2008, 390).

The Didache teaches clearly that there is an expected code of purity. However, Repschinski observes a compromise. While all are expected to keep Torah, Gentiles are merely to do as well as they can (Repschinski 2008, 393). The purity in mind is not so much a ritual purity which guards worship, but a moral purity which breaks down barriers between people. Failure to pursue this moral purity can result in quarrels which, in turn, defile the ritual of the eucharist described in Didache 14 (Repschinski 2008, 394). ​
0 Comments

Oaths and Vows in James, Matthew, and the Didache

8/30/2023

0 Comments

 
8/30/23
Scholarly Reflections
Vahrenhorst, Martin. "Chapter Sixteen: The Presence and Absence of a Prohibition of Oath in James, Matthew, and the Didache and Its significance for Contextualization." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 361-377.

Vahrenhorst notes the scholarly opinions about Matthew shifting toward the writing coming from a community which is first Christian but with Jewish elements, rather than one which is first Jewish but with Christian elements (Vahrenhorst 2008, 362). Just the same, he sees in Matthew, especially 5:17-20, a solid allegiance to the Torah, with a typical rabbinic desire to apply the principles to everyday life.

The nature of oaths and vows in different Jewish contexts is a matter of substantial debate (Vahrenhorst 2008, 365). Because of this, Vahrenhorst considers a study of oaths in Matthew, James, and the Didache likely to be fruitful. The prohibition of swearing an oath using God's name serves to guard against asserting wrong values to God or claiming He is responsible for our failure to keep a promise (Vahrenhorst 2008, 365). Yet it is necessary to make firm promises. Therefore, Jewish writings tend to suggest promises, calling upon parents or other authorities (Vahrenhorst 2008, 366). Vahrenhorst notes that there was a distinction made between swearing an oath and making a vow, which would still express a commitment to an action but would avoid profaning God's name (Vahrenhorst 2008, 366-367).

Matthew has three significant passages regarding oaths. In 5:33-37, Matthew records Jesus as teaching that vows made to the Lord are binding (Vahrenhorst 2008, 368). To avoid breaking a vow, one should avoid making vows. In effect, the logical implication of involving God in a vow is that God will keep the promise if the promiser fails to do so. The same counsel appears in Matthew 23:16-22, where the Jewish leaders are identified as "blind" (Vahrenhorst 2008, 369). In the other, brief, passage, Peter denies knowing Jesus, using an oath. This is clearly seen as a negative response.

The Didache contains only one saying, in 2:2, about oaths, prohibiting those which are false (Vahrenhorst 2008, 371). However, the Torah is not mentioned specifically as an authority for the moral views of the Didache. Just the same, the moral authority seems to be drawn from Old Testament passages (Vahrenhorst 2008, 372). There are widely recognized halakhic elements in the Didache, which show a positive relationship with Jewish thought (Vahrenhorst 2008, 373).

James 5:12 makes a clear prohibition of oaths, but with no explanation (Vahrenhorst 2008, 375). This is consistent with the concern James shows with the ethics surrounding speech. One's life is to be consistent, including a confluence of speech and actions.

​
0 Comments

Instruction and Baptism in Matthew, James, and the Didache

8/29/2023

0 Comments

 
8/29/23
Scholarly Reflections
Stewart-Sykes, Alistair. "Chapter Fifteen: Ἀποκύησις λόγῳ ἀληθείας: Paraenesis and Baptism in Matthew, James, and the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 341-359.

Stewart-Sykes considers the paraenetic content of Matthew, James, and the Didache as regards baptism (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 341). He is particularly interested in the specific pre-baptismal instruction specified in the Didache. Following Pseudo-Isocrates (Ad Demonicum), Stewart-Sykes suggests a distinction between paraenesis, or ethical advice, and exhortation (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 342). There is certainly an element of exhortation, but the primary goal is giving advice. Stewart-Sykes goes on to cite a variety of scholarly opinions further identifying what would be meant by paraenesis (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 343-345).

The Two Ways material in the Didache, taken in context, is ethical instruction intended to prepare one for baptism (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 345). Matthew 5-7 is another example of paraenesis. Stewart- Sykes considers that, in light of the command to baptize and teach, from Matthew 28, that the instruction in chapters 5-7 should be viewed in light of pre-baptismal instruction (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 345-346). James, as a whole, can readily be understood as paraenetic in nature (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 346). It is marked by extensive ethical content. The context, however, is not that of prebaptismal instruction.

Stewart-Sykes begins an analysis of the meaning of baptism with James, who views baptism as the point of rebirth, a gift of God (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 348). This is accompanied by a "word of truth," which would likely be either words spoken at the baptism or as teaching beforehand. Matthew's Gospel ties baptism to an eschatological hope. The baptized person has an immediate hope in Christ as well as a hope at the end of the world (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 349).

Stewart-Sykes discusses the understanding of baptism as either in the name of the Trinity (Matthew and Didache) or in the name of Jesus (James) (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 350ff). By the early third century we have more extensive baptismal rites, though without a specific formula spoken. There are some assumptions that a development in thought occurred, resulting in a clear Trinitarian confession and act, but this is nowhere clearly stated in antiquity (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 351).

Stewart-Sykes returns to the question of pre-baptismal instruction in James. The concept is not stated clearly in James, but there may be allusions to it (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 353). He finds this to be the case in James 1:19-21, where there is exhortation, apparently repeated for those who have already been taught, to pursue life consistent with that in Matthew 5:21-23 and in the Didache's Way of Life (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 354). Stewart-Sykes goes on to identify a number of instances where James calls readers to a life consistent with the Didache's Way of Life.

In conclusion, Stewart-Sykes finds the three documents all speak to the reality of pre-baptismal instruction, and that those instructions guide the candidate for baptism into a particular mode of life which also includes an eschatological hope (Stewart-Sykes 2008, 356-357).

​
0 Comments

Ethics in James, Matthew, and the Didache

8/25/2023

0 Comments

 
8/25/23
Scholarly Reflections
Hartin, Patrick J. "Chapter Thirteen: Ethics in the letter of James, the Gospel of Matthew, and the Didache: Their Place in Early Christian literature." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 289-314.

Hartin considers the relationship of the ethical world of Israel and of Christianity, as addressed in James, the Didache, and Matthew, taking them in that order, which he thinks is the order of composition (Hartin 2008, 289). The ethical world is important as it largely provides a means to identify a particular group (Hartin 2008, 290).

James, addressing people of Israel who are dispersed, roots their identity in belonging to Israel (Hartin 2008, 291). There is an eschatological hope of restoration. They are pictured as rooted in the Torah, God's law (Hartin 2008, 292). The Law creates the identity of the people by describing how God has dealt with His people (Hartin 2008, 292). This socializes them in a particular way.

Matthew's Gospel is also rooted in the historical people of Israel (Hartin 2008, 293). Jesus' ministry and that of his disciples primarily focuses on Israel, not the Gentiles. Jesus specifically denies coming to do away with Torah, but affirms it and fulfills it (Hartin 2008, 294).

Hartin further finds the Didache to be rooted in Israelite identity (Hartin 2008, 295). However, unlike Matthew and James, it clearly has a concern for Gentiles. The ethic of the Torah is applied to the Gentile community as well as those from a Jewish background. This, again, is a means of socializing the people and creating one recognizable community.

In James, Hartin finds perfection as an important ethical marker (Hartin 2008, 297). The intention is that the people should be blameless, as the lamb offered to God was without blemish. Matthew also has a concept of perfection, which occurs as we imitate God in His concern for both good and bad (Hartin 2008, 299). Perfection in the Didache is also based on keeping Torah, and especially the Way of Life (Hartin 2008, 300). The people are to maintain purity above all. This creates their identity as people in a living relationship with God (Hartin 2008, 301). Hartin concludes that James, Matthew, and the Didache are alike in their call to perfection. However, while Matthew roots perfection in imitation of God, James focuses on the just works of care for others (Hartin 2008, 302). The Didache prescribes actions, but does not elaborate on them (Hartin 2008, 303). However, the actions are similar to the actions of God. This, says Hartin, is the standard for all three documents. The Christian is to be consistent, of a single mind (Hartin 2008, 305).

The twofold love command is also an important element in all three texts (Hartin 2008, 305). However, Hartin notes it is used in a different way in each. In James, the relationship of faith and works requires a conclusion that love for others must be practiced diligently. This is the predominant law of God's kingdom. In Matthew's Gospel, loving God and the neighbor is the means of fulfilling the Law and the prophets (Hartin 2008, 307). This embodies perfection, but based on the Scripture, as opposed to the more abstract concept of "kingdom" from James. In contrast, the Didache describes loving God and the neighbor in terms of remaining on the path of life (Hartin 2008, 307). The path of death, conversely, involves the lack of mercy.

Hartin next considers how the three documents fit into the context of the growing body of Christian literature. James works mostly with the conceptual world of the Septuagint and sayings of Jesus (Hartin 2008, 309). He takes them as harmonious and complementary. Matthew, though he uses sayings of Jesus extensively, uses them differently than James. "He preserves the character of the saying and transforms it only slightly to accord with other traditional material at his disposal and his theological vision" (Hartin 2008, 309). The Didache uses Jesus traditions less frequently, and, in Hartin's opinion, tends not to adjust the sayings (Hartin 2008, 310). Hartin notes that the Letter of Barnabas has a two ways section which likely derives from the same source used for the Didache (Hartin 2008, 310-311). Paul's conceptual framework may be contrasted to that of James. While Paul is more concerned with Jesus' work to complete salvation, James is more concerned that the Christian should actively live out the faith (Hartin 2008, 311). Counter to Paul, Matthew does not speak of slavery to sin or why we would not carry out God's law (Hartin 2008, 311-312). Matthew tends to focus on actions. Hartin observes that John gives few ethical instructions other than the need to love (Hartin 2008, 312).

Hartin concludes that Matthew, James, and the Didache each provides an ethical framework but that they differ in nature due to the time and context of their composition. He places James first, writing to communities which are essentially Israelite (Hartin 2008, 313). Matthew he sees next, in a context which welcomes and incorporates gentiles into the community (Hartin 2008, 314). Finally, the Didache, a few decades later, but from the same community as Matthew, reflects a more robust gentile Christian community.
0 Comments

"Love" in Matthew, James, and the Didache

8/24/2023

0 Comments

 
8/24/23
Scholarly Reflections
Konradt, Matthias. "Chapter Twelve: The Love Command in Matthew, James, and the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 271-288.

Konradt notes that the command to love is such a common trait of Christianity that an evaluation of it in Matthew, James, and the Didache would seem unlikely to yield any useful results (Konradt 2008, 271). Yet he proceeds to highlight some of the similarities before showing the marks which make the three documents fit the same milieu (Konradt 2008, 272).

Matthew uses the command to love the neighbor specifically three times (Konradt 2008, 272). Loving the neighbor, or, for that matter, loving the enemy, sets people up to be sons of God (Konradt 2008, 273). Love for the neighbor, in Matthew 19:20-21, involves giving to the poor (Konradt 2008, 275). Love for the neighbor is seen as the means of fulfilling the Law (Konradt 2008, 278). 

James makes it clear that the love command is highly important. However, Konradt observes the function of that command is a matter of dispute (Konradt 2008, 278). He takes it to be intended as the command which sums up everything else and holds an ethical life together. Love is not held in the abstract in James. In 2:13 love results in showing mercy to the poor, particularly orphans and widows. Konradt notes this is not merely giving alms, but also showing respect (Konradt 2008, 279). The law does not consist of love. In fact, it goes much farther because that love is to be worked out in our various interactions with others (Konradt 2008, 281).

The Didache opens the "Way of Life" with the love command and a negative version of the Golden Rule (Konradt 2008, 282). Konradt notes that the two elements also seem to summarize the law in Matthew (Konradt 2008, 283). The similarities of James and the Didache are less clear. Perfection in the Didache is related to a love for the neighbor, but also the enemy, and to turning the other cheek (Konradt 2008, 285). It may also be tied to keeping the whole Torah, though that may not be as clearly discerned (Konradt 2008, 285-286).

Konradt finally asks whether the three documents represent the same branch of Christianity. The use of the love command is a common element which regularly shows continuity with an interpretation of the Torah (Konradt 2008, 286). The love command is seen in all as central to the law, but not as a reduction of the law. Rather, it motivates ethical behavior and attitudes which are consonant with the law.

​
0 Comments

Pluralism in Matthew, James, and the Didache

8/23/2023

0 Comments

 
8/23/23
Scholarly Reflections
Overman, J. Andrew. "Chapter Eleven: Problems with Pluralism in Second Temple Judaism: Matthew, James, and the Didache in their Jewish-Roman Milieu." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 259-270.

Overman observes a growing awareness in scholarly discussion that the Jewish and Christian traditions in ante-Nicene Roman contexts are difficult to separate. It took several hundred years for them to become clearly distinguished from one another (Overman 2008, 259). This may well have been related to the rather significant tolerance of the Roman administration, which allowed an extensive collection of fragmentary groups to exist, all being tolerated as varieties of Judaism (Overman 2008, 260). In fact, in Overman's opinion, these groups would have been indistinguishable to a Roman. Overman describes, using Matthew, the Didache, and James, the distinctions which set three groups apart from one another.

Matthew holds that the orthodox Christian community is centered around Jesus' teachings of a right view of Torah (Overman 2008, 261). Other teachers have brought trouble on the people (Overman 2008, 262). Several of the parables of Jesus illustrate the damage caused to the society by unjust client and lordship relations and abuse of tax and charitable policies.

The Didache has a different way of identifying the Christian community. Overman takes it possibly to distinguish between ὁ κύριος and Jesus, with Jesus being mentioned only rarely (Overman 2008, 264). The church, which is seen as larger than a local organization, is loyal to "the Lord." Structure and order of the community is an important element. The ethic articulated is similar to that of Matthew, creating a kinship between the documents (Overman 2008, 265). This, rather than a Christology, would define the group.

James, by contrast to Matthew and the Didache, shows considerable influence of thought rooted in both Hellenism and an allegiance to Jesus (Overman 2008, 266). Overman finds it philosophically sophisticated, with elements of Stoic philosophy present (Overman 2008, 267). The tension over economic diversity is present both in the Didache and James. The community is to embrace humility, which will move them to correct this tension.

Overman estimates that of the three types of Christianity represented by Matthew, the Didache, and James, it is the vision of James that would be able to engage the Roman culture in a long-lasting manner (Overman 2008, 269).
0 Comments

Jesus Traditions in Matthew, James, and the Didache

8/22/2023

0 Comments

 
8/22/23
Scholarly Reflections
Schröter, Jens. "Chapter Ten: Jesus Tradition in Matthew, James, and the Didache: Searching for Characteristic Emphases." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 233-255.

Schröter, while acknowledging Matthew, James, and the Didache as arising from and speaking initially to particular contexts, also finds "sound evidence that they are not, or at least not exclusively, addressed to a specific community, but to 'all Christians'" (Schröter 2008, 2334). They also show distinct concepts of divergence from Judaism.

In Matthew, while Jesus clearly affirms the law, he is critical of the defects in the righteousness of the Pharisees (Schröter 2008, 234-235). The Jewish identity as evidenced in synagogue life is therefore less important. The ideal community is centered on Jesus' interpretation of the law and contains both Jews and Gentiles.

In the Didache, Schröter considers that Christianity was distancing itself from both Jewish and Gentile identities (Schröter 2008, 235). Analysis of this trend is made more difficult due to the composite nature of the document. Schröter finds that some passages show a separation from Judaism more clearly than others (Schröter 2008, 236).

In regard to the relationship with Judaism, James is more complex. James creates a view of the perfect life in relation to God's gift (Jas 1:17) (Schröter 2008, 236). There is a strong element of Jewish wisdom tradition, but simultaneously an ethic which is distinct from an actual Jewish identity.

Schröter's discussion of "Jesus tradition" begins with an attempt at definition of the term. He does not consider much of what we would identify as Jesus tradition as actually coming from Jesus himself, but as concepts which were ascribed to him by others (Schröter 2008, 237). Further, it may have been quite common for ideas to be articulated by authors, taking them as those of Jesus, but with no attribution (Schröter 2008, 238). Schröter's assumption that the author of James was not present with Jesus draws him to conclude that "it is by no means self-evident that James had access to traditions that originated with Jesus himself" (Schröter 2008, 238).

The Didache makes several references to "the Lord" or to "the Gospel" as an authority (Schröter 2008, 238). Schröter details a number of passages, assigning them to a redactor who did not seem to be referencing a written Gospel (Schröter 2008, 239). 

Schröter concludes that the only way we can clearly discern traditions in James or the Didache as Jesus traditions is through our knowledge of the Synoptic Gospels (Schröter 2008, 240). Matthew singularly assigned the teachings in his Gospel to Jesus, describing them as what we would call "Jesus traditions."

The three documents do all have a clearly discernible call for "perfection" (Schröter 2008, 241). Additionally, the three documents share significant elements in their ethic.

In James, gaining wisdom is a means of approaching perfection (Schröter 2008, 242). Enduring trials is seen as a catalyst for gaining wisdom. The trials produce endurance, which leads to wisdom. Schröter relates James to 1 Peter and the Pauline epistles, as they also tend to speak of trials as leading to growth in divine wisdom (Schröter 2008, 243-244). The concept is related to a Synoptic tradition in which one is given rewards from God in conjunction with humility (Schröter 2008, 244-245).

Matthew describes perfection in terms of the perfect nature of God the Father (Schröter 2008, 246). Schröter considers Matthew to describe this perfection as being achieved through a fulfilling of God's law. Counter to James' view of perfection through wisdom, Matthew emphasizes obedience. This is done through association with Jesus (Schröter 2008, 247).

On the three occasions that perfection is mentioned in the Didache, Schröter notes it is tied to holding to the teaching presented (Schröter 2008, 249). The teaching leads to a lifestyle of obedience, in which people participate in the liturgy of baptism, prayer, and Eucharist. These all have elements of mercy, forgiveness, and humility. The prayer and fasting rituals have a close affinity to Jewish customs, as part of the liturgy of life (Schröter 2008, 252).

Schröter concludes that in Matthew, James, and the Didache, there is considerable continuity with Judaism, but a subtle shift in the locus of authority (Matthew), the emphasis on ethic rather than ritual (James), and an introduction of Chrsitian liturgy (Didache) shows a distinct Christian point of view (Schröter 2008, 254).
0 Comments

Poverty and Piety in Early Christianity

8/21/2023

0 Comments

 
8/21/23
Scholarly Reflections
Kloppenborg, John S. "Chapter Nine: Poverty and Piety in Matthew, James, and the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 201-232.

Kloppenborg observes that poverty and piety were often associated with each other prior to the first century, and that in a way the poor were considered recipients of God's special favor, which supported them in their trials (Kloppenborg 2008,201). They, after all, were the humble before God. By that token, all who humbled themselves before God could be considered as the poor, and thus be recognized as among the pious (Kloppenborg 2008,202). This has often been recognized as a correlation in James. The value expressed in James is not necessarily that of becoming economically impoverished, but of adopting the humility characteristic of poor people (Kloppenborg 2008, 204).

Just treatment, and generous care for the poor is a common theme in biblical and other ancient Near Eastern writings (Kloppenborg 2008, 205). Care for the poor is a positive value, which sets wisdom apart from foolishness. Poverty itself is not a mark of wisdom, though it does place one into a position of receiving God's care (Kloppenborg 2008, 206). Kloppenborg notes that while poverty was not considered a virtue, the piety which was often found to accompany poverty was considered exemplary (Kloppenborg 2008, 208). The actual definition of "poor" is challenging, as Kloppenborg illustrates. Scholarly opinion is uncertain what financial criteria may have been in mind when "the poor" are discussed in biblical texts. Piety, however, was normally viewed in internal terms, not related to income or assets (Kloppenborg 2008, 211). 

The relationship of poverty and piety continues in later Jewish literature. Kloppenborg illustrates the relationship with citations from the Qumran literature (Kloppenborg 2008, 214ff).

Kloppenborg notes the difficulty in distinguishing among words for poverty, as a variety of words appear in Matthew, James, and the Didache (Kloppenborg 2008, 216-217). Kloppenborg approaches the issue by considering that the words are essentially synonymous but that in general there are more and less severe levels of poverty indicated (Kloppenborg 2008, 218). He does not find a clear connection between poverty and piety in the Didache, except that charity to the poor is considered an act of piety. The poor become pious as they receive Christian instruction, not as a result of their poverty (Kloppenborg 2008, 222).

As with the Didache, Kloppenborg finds Matthew's concern for the poor to indicate they should receive charitable care (Kloppenborg 2008, 222). This charity is a means by which God's favor may be passed on to the poor (Kloppenborg 2008, 223).

Likewise, James is concerned with the poor, but Kloppenborg does not find his description to suggest an inherent piety. Rather, it suggests a humility which would dispose them to receive teaching (Kloppenborg 2008, 225-226). The pious could be rich or poor, but must be of a humble spirit (Kloppenborg 2008, 228).

​
0 Comments

Ideal Christianity in Matthew, James, and the Didache

8/18/2023

0 Comments

 
8/18/23
Scholarly Reflections
Weren, Wim J.C. "Chapter Eight: The Ideal Community according to Matthew, James, and the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 177-200.

Weren observes a similarity among Matthew, James, and the Didache in that all three documents make an attempt to define what a community should be (Weren 2008, 177). He evaluates this attempt at self-definition through the community's self-references, their concept of a relationship with God, and their idea of perfection. Weren conducts his evaluation using several key words.

First, all three documents use the term ἐκκλησία (Weren 2008, 178). Matthew distinguishes between ἐκκλησία and συναγωγή, with the former term referring only to disciples of Jesus, while the latter refers to specifically Jewish assemblies (Weren 2008, 178). In James 5:14, the elders are related to the ἐκκλησία (Weren 2008, 180). Unlike Matthew's use, the one time συναγωγή is used in James (2:2), it also may refer to the Christian assembly. The Didache uses ἐκκλησία to refer to the assembled Christians locally as well as around the world (Weren 2008, 181). The communities thus refer to themselves using the distinctive term ἐκκλησία to refer to a particular gathering of Christians. 

Matthew identifies the community in terms of being led by God's revelation in Christ, making the community members children of God (Weren 2008, 182). James expresses a very strong relationship between the people and God the Father (Weren 2008, 184). In contrast, Weren finds that James makes little reference to Jesus as the Christ or God the Son. He is mentioned twice and referred to as the Lord, but Weren finds the mentions to be less important than those of God the Father (Weren 2008, 185). The Didache also asserts a close, important relationship between God and the community (Weren 2008, 185). Jesus is referred to by name in Didache 9.2, 3, and 10.2, always as the "servant" of God (Weren 2008, 185). There is a need to do activities in the name of "the Lord" and the people look forward to a final coming of the Lord. Weren takes this normally to refer to Jesus (Weren 2008, 186).

To evaluate the concept of perfection, Weren reviews the semantic usage of the adjective τέλειος as used in Matthew, James, and the Didache. The term describes "the ideal behavior of the community" in all three documents (Weren 2008, 186). In Matthew there is a particular emphasis on being perfect as God is perfect. Weren takes this particularly to signify right discernment of good and evil, with fair and generous treatment of others, especially those within the community (Weren 2008, 187). Torah is to be kept fully, without neglect of any of the points. It is also necessary, unlike the Pharisees, to recognize the values underlying the Torah (Weren 2008, 188).

In James, τέλειος is connected directly with nouns such as work, law, or wisdom (Weren 2008, 190). While wisdom is an important feature of life, Weren considers it crucial to James that the focus must be on God. This is where perfection will be found. Weren notes that in James there is a way of life and a way of death, but there is no assumption that reality is deterministic (Weren 2008, 191). Weren describes the two ways in some detail. The law of God, embodied in His word, is decidedly a good thing (Weren 2008, 193). The overall problem presented in James is that people do not actually have the attitude required in the Law (Weren 2008, 194).

The view of perfection in the Didache is a bit different. The τελει___ word group appears relatively infrequently, with only four usages (Weren 2008, 196). Weren notes credible suggestions that two of the instances are redactional in nature. Keeping of Torah is clearly important, yet there may well be two groups within the community, one of which habitually keeps Torah as a matter of cultural custom and another which is encouraged but not required to do so (Weren 2008, 197).

Weren concludes that Matthew and James tend to follow similar patterns in terms of discussing perfection, while the Didache has a different pattern of discussion, though the same long-run expectation (Weren 2008, 198). In all three documents the Christian community is clearly distinct from society as a whole. There is always an expectation that people will mature to some sort of perfection which is related to keeping Torah and its underlying values.
0 Comments

Apostles, Teachers, Evangelists in Matthew, James and the Didache

8/17/2023

0 Comments

 
8/17/23
Scholarly Reflections
Draper, Jonathan A. "Chapter Seven: Apostles, Teachers, and Evangelists: Stability and Movement of Functionaries in Matthew, James, and the Didache." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 139-176.

Draper notes the significant discussion regarding the roles of bishops and deacons in early Christianity and how their roles may have grown to the present roles. The appearance of bishops and deacons along with apostles, prophets, and teachers in the Didache is of interest (Draper 2008, 139). At issue is the authority inherent in the different offices (Draper 2008, 140).

Matthew's Gospel, as it is not a church order, does not speak specifically about organization. Yet Draper does find some evidence of such an outlook (Draper 2008, 142). In Matthew the apostles are often the primary recipients of Jesus' teaching. Draper sees them as responsible for "mediating the teaching and ministry of Jesus" in the post resurrection period (Draper 2008, 143). They thus provide continuity in terms of ministry, following on the heels of the prophets. In contrast, the false prophets, noted in Matthew 7:15-23, are wolves who will cause harm to the people of God (Draper 2008, 144-145). The false prophets come from outside the community and work miracles in Jesus' name (Matthew 7:22). Yet Jesus describes them as "lawless." This is a similar expression of the situation to that in the Didache (Draper 2008, 146).

The passage in Matthew immediately following the Sermon on the Mount emphasizes the itinerant nature of Jesus and his lack of possessions (Draper 2008, 147). This appears to serve as a paradigm for the lifestyle which would be expected of the leaders who would follow Jesus. Likewise, those who follow Jesus are not to seek out power and authority. Draper notes that in Matthew it is only Jesus who should be recognized as the teacher (Draper 2008, 148). The Twelve, designated as "apostles" only in 10:4, are to function as Jesus' emissaries. Within the culture, this would imply only a delegated authority, rather than any personal authority (Draper 2008, 149). This is the opposite of the false prophets, who exalt themselves, and use their own authority. Draper describes this in some detail (Draper 2008, 150-151). As an illustration of the nature of the true apostles, Draper notes in Matthew 16:18-19 that Peter is addressed as the one who repeats the word of the Father and upon whom the church will be built (Draper 2008, 153). The church is to be a place of conciliatory care (18;14-20) and of humble service (20:26-28). While Draper sees a structure of leadership, then, he sees it as different in nature from the authority as expected from Gentile rulers (Draper 2008, 154).

The Didache, at least from its title, seems to suggest a more clear and formal structure, with governance coming from the apostolic group (Draper 2008, 155). By Didache 11:4-6 there seems to be a larger group of apostles in mind (Draper 2008, 156). This larger group. however, is urged to move on to another location quickly and with minimal provision. Draper suggests that apostolic travel, for instance, that described in Acts 15:22-35, could still take place. At the actual destination the apostle(s) would show letters introducing them and their mission, then be considered less itinerant. The process in the Didache would apply to the journey, which should have minimal delay (Draper 2008, 157). Draper notes that the Didache may allow apostles to be considered prophets and vice versa.

The prophet is considered to be speaking from God, so is not to be tested or judged (Didache 11:7) (Draper 2008, 158). There is an assumption, rather, that evaluation is to be made based on lifestyle rather than words. If the prophet follows the "ways of the Lord" (11:8b), he is accepted as a prophet (Draper 2008, 159). What these ways are is a matter of some debate. Draper also notes that Didache 11:9-12 is difficult to interpret in terms of the prophet and participation at "a table." It is not clear if this refers to a eucharistic celebration or some other occasion of eating (Draper 2008, 160). Draper takes the statements about prophets to show redactional development, with the status of a prophet increasing to one of considerable respect later in the text (Draper 2008, 161-162). Yet, the community is to watch out for false prophets, who come from within and turn to evil purposes.

Draper further notes that Didache 13 and 15 associate prophets with teachers (Draper 2008, 162). While the apostles are never classified with the teachers, prophets are. Draper considers whether the teachers are considered charismatic figures, as apostles apparently are, and whether teachers are itinerant or resident in the community. He observes that the teacher can be evaluated in terms of words and work, which likely signals a resident role (Draper 2008, 163). The teacher is assumed to receive some support. If, in fact, the community came together on possibly even a daily basis, and depended on the work of the teacher, that person would need support (Draper 2008, 164).

Bishops and deacons are mentioned together in Didache 15:1-2. They have the same qualifications as each other for office (Draper 2008, 166). Draper observes that what we know of a distinction is implicit in their title - an overseer as compared with a servant of the community. In some way they have been recognized and appointed by the community.

Draper next evaluates functionaries as seen in James. The letter tells little about community officials, mentioning elders and teachers (Draper 2008, 168). Prophets are adduced in vague terms as examples of those who endure suffering. The author makes no claim to apostleship, but merely to being a slave of Jesus. However, Draper notes he clearly expects the recipients of the letter will recognize him as an authority. Teachers, those in the role the author includes himself, are considered to face a higher standard of judgment than others (Draper 2008, 169). Teachers can lead people rightly or they can lead people astray. They are therefore capable of good or evil. The teacher, in James, is judged, as in the Didache, based on the content, which is inherent in the words and the lifestyle (Draper 2008, 170). Aside from his focus on teachers, James speaks of a body of elders, whose function is to pray for people. Draper observes these people would "necessarily[,] be resident and settled in local communities" (Draper 2008, 172).

Draper concludes that there are significant points of commonality around Matthew, James, and the Didache as far as recognized functionaries (Draper 2008, 173). Apostles and prophets tend to be classed together, possibly due to some level of charismatic gifts. Prophets are also associated with teachers, but teachers tend to have a more localized role in the community (Draper 2008, 174). There is an authority assumed of teachers.
0 Comments

Antioch - Historical Development - 1st century

8/14/2023

0 Comments

 
8/14/23
Scholarly Reflections
Zetterholm, Magnus. "Chapter Four: The Didache, Matthew, James - and Paul: Reconstructing Historical Developments in Antioch." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 73-90.

Zetterholm observes the complexity of interpretation of texts so as to reconstruct historical details in antiquity (Zetterholm 2008, 73). It is often necessary to find adequate historical context in order to interpret a text. However, the historical context may need to be found from within multiple other texts. Paul's relationship to Judaism in general and specifically to the Torah is a challenging question, to which scholars have posited a wide array of answers (Zetterholm 2008, 74).

Zetterholm suggests using a deductive system of creating and testing hypotheses so as to seek overall understanding of the text (Zetterholm 2008, 75-76). The results are necessarily tentative, since, unlike in mathematical proofs, one could expect a number of different hypotheses yielding the same answer. However, in a complex social and historical construct, the method can clarify more plausible conclusions (Zetterholm 2008, 76).

To test the methodology, Zetterholm evaluates an hypothesis of Jonathan Draper, from 1991, in which he considered the relationship of "Torah and Troublesome Apostles in the Didache Community" (NTS 33:355) (Zetterholm 2008, 77). Draper's hypothesis is that Matthew and the Didache influenced one another, and that both originated in Antioch. Draper argues that Didache 11:1-2 is related to Matthew 5:17-20, and that it represents a redaction of Didache 11:3-4 (Zetterholm 2008, 78).

Draper takes the same historical setting to underlie both passages. In the same vein, Draper takes Didache 6:1-3 to speak of keeping the law and food customs to have arisen from a context of Torah-observant Christians in the community (Zetterholm 2008, 79). Draper is able to defend this idea and his suggestion of Antioch as the community in question based on Galatians 2:11-14, where Antioch is the site of a question about dietary laws (Zetterholm 2008, 80). This then suggests to Draper that Paul would be the false apostle of the Didache, teaching something other than Torah. Matthew, then, shows a slightly later tradition, as reconciliation is considered possible Zetterholm notes that Draper took a plausible hypothesis and showed that it could be arrived at by deduction from ideas that could be demonstrated (Zetterholm 2008, 80).

Zetterholm shows that such a conclusion can be altered through use of only a slight shift in hypothesis. If, in fact, we are uncertain of an actual literary relationship between Didache 11:1-2 and Matthew 5:17-20, the path of deduction could lead elsewhere (Zetterholm 2008, 81). 

Zetterholm builds an alternative case for the passage in Didache 11, suggesting that the basic concern is not that of ritual impurity (Zetterholm 2008, 81). Eating meat from an unclean animal would result in ritual impurity, but would easily be taken care of. It was not necessarily considered a moral failure (Zetterholm 2008, 82). Moral impurity does not change the ritual status, but a ritual impurity does. Further, "non-Jews, by definition, were exempted from the ritual purity regulations and were not considered intrinsically impure" (Zetterholm 2008, 83). If this is the issue, the actual food was of little importance in the conflict of Galatians 2:11-14. The question in Antioch was related to the means of salvation of the non-Jewish converts (Acts 15:1, 5). The moral impurity involved in living as a Gentile in the Roman world could possibly be dealt with by conversion to Judaism. However it was not deemed necessary by the council in Acts 15. The Gentiles were merely exhorted to avoid certain practices which were offensive to all Jews (Zetterholm 2008, 85).

Zetterholm observes that, following this line of deduction, we can still assume an origin of both texts in Antioch, but that we find a different response. While Matthew would urge observance of Torah, the Didache would not (Zetterholm 2008, 86). This is the opposite of the conclusion Draper reaches, as he takes the Didache to urge Torah observance on Gentiles. Zetterholm suggests based on his line of deduction that Didache 6.2 reflects a time before Paul would have been in Antioch. The non-Jews could worship by keeping Torah but would not be required to do so (Zetterholm 2008, 88). ​
0 Comments

Didache - Social and Religious Milieu

8/11/2023

0 Comments

 
8/11/23
Scholarly Reflections
Zangenberg, Jürgen. "Chapter Three: Reconstructing the Social and Religious Milieu of the Didache: Observations and Possible Results." in Van de Sandt, Huub & Zangenberg, Jürgen K. (editors). Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related Documents in their Jewish and Christian Settings." Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008, 43-69.

Zangenberg notes that a milieu is a larger category than a text. No single text actually expresses the social, cultural, historical, and literary totality from which it arises (Zangenberg 2008, 43). One of the intriguing aspects of the Didache is that it is very difficult to place in an ideological milieu. It tends to defy clear categorization (Zangenberg 2008, 44). Among other difficulties, we have few examples from the New Testament period and immediately afterward which provide clear information about their provenance and the intended use. Paul's letters are the notable exception (Zangenberg 2008, 45). Zangenberg seeks out the internal markers which could help to clarify the Didache's milieu.

Zangenberg acknowledges that the Didache is anonymous. He further suggests it may have circulated without a title, and that both the shorter and longer titles were later addenda (Zangenberg 2008, 46). There may have been quotations in Clement of Alexandria, but the first clear and specific use is around 300 in Pseudo-Cyprian (Zangenberg 2008, 47), when it may have been considered to hold apostolic status, being quoted alongside Paul (Zangenberg 2008, 48).

From the perspective of authorship, Zangenberg notes that it is relatively common for collections of teachings gathered from a variety of sources for use in a community to be without an identifiable author (Zangenberg 2008, 48). Though the material was certainly gathered and edited together by somebody, that person's identity is almost incidental. The community is of much greater importance. In the same way, a text of such a work was more fluid than the text of one creator intended for a particular occasion (Zangenberg 2008, 49).

The claims of the Didache to represent normative teaching are important. Because there is material pertaining to theological instruction, community order, and specific liturgical practice, the text presents intersections which could be used to grasp its context clearly (Zangenberg 2008, 50). However, as a composite, it is possible that these elements are drawn from very different contexts, a complicating factor. The Two Ways material, though it has structural similarities to Greek philosophical teaching, in Zangenberg's estimation, is taken over from a Jewish original (Zangenberg 2008, 51). Yet he is clear that the Didache is a distinctively Christian text. The various passages of instruction may have been used to encourage faithful perseverance in the community and to build cohesion, rather than as one-time instruction. While Zangenberg finds clear instructional material, he finds relatively few passages in which structural, practical, and interpretive elements are found together (Zangenberg 2008, 52). In general, Zangenberg finds that the bulk of regulations speak to particular situations but give little information about the community or the context of the situations (Zangenberg 2008, 53). Because of the lack of distinctive contexts, as well as the lack of some topics, Zangenberg does not consider the Didache to fit well into the category of a church order. It does not provide a complete doctrinal or practical picture of the community.

Having rejected several ideas, Zangenberg moves to a constructive approach to identifying the milieu of the Didache. Dealing with prominent themes, he seeks out their most likely origins (Zangenberg 2008, 54). The Two Ways materials indicate Jewish roots in the thought life of the community. Though the Didache itself is Christian in character, the Two Ways material shows a good deal of continuity with Judaism (Zangenberg 2008, 55). The eucharistic practice and the accompanying idea of fasting also shows a strong relationship to Jewish ideology. The change of fast days specified in the Didache signals continuity with Jewish fasting practices but also a sharp disconnect, as the culturally observed times are changed (Zangenberg 2008, 56). In terms of prayer, not only does the Didache retain prayer three times a day, but the structure of the prayers is recognizable from Jewish prayers known to us (Zangenberg 2008, 58). Giving of alms, which is present though not prominent in the Didache, is an important part of Jewish piety. It is affirmed, though not discussed in detail in the Didache (Zangenberg 2008, 59). The εὐχαριστία - prayers and a ritual - are not clearly tied to specific Jewish practice, but are consonant with a structure and rhythm we expect in a community liturgy (Zangenberg 2008, 60). Within the community life, as shown in Didache 11:1-13:17; 15:1-3, prophets and teachers have similar responsibilities to one another. Their privilege is not unlimited, but they have freedom in prayer and teaching (Zangenberg 2008, 61). Christianity, as described in the Didache, has many practices which are adopted from Jewish life. Yet Zangenberg finds it to be entirely distinct from Judaism (Zangenberg 2008, 63).

Zangenberg concludes that the Didache comes from a setting in which Christianity is not considered completely separate from Judaism (Zangenberg 2008, 65). There are clear separations, for instance, in table fellowship and in fasting. The numerous allusions to New Testament texts seem to expect a knowledge of the information but not necessarily the literary gospel account (Zangenberg 2008, 66). There are connections with Paul and James, but mostly on the level of consonance of their thought worlds. The literary resemblance is minimal (Zangenberg 2008, 68). ​
0 Comments

Eucharist in Didache

2/24/2023

0 Comments

 
2/24/2023
Scholarly Reflections

LaVerdiere, Eugene. "Chapter Nine: On the Lord's Day: The Eucharist in the Didache." The Eucharist in the New Testament and the Early Church. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press (Pueblo), 1996, 112-147.

LaVerdiere asserts that the Didache underwent a process of collecting, collating, and redacting statements amounting to about fifty years, resulting in the form of it which we now have (LaVerdiere 1996, 128). The eucharist appears in chapters 9-10 and 14, along with a reference to "the Lord's Day." Because of its early representation of Christianity outside of the canonical tradition, the Didache is a valuable witness.

Of interest to LaVerdiere is the fact that the eucharistic prayers in the Didache "were not integrated into the New Testament while so many other traditions were" (LaVerdiere 1996, 129). Traditions, however, exist only within a community. For this reason, it is important to identify the community and its relationship with other communities such as those which are related to the canonical writings. LaVerdiere asserts that, while the community surrounding Matthew's Gospel was open to change, the Didache community was not (LaVerdiere 1996, 130-131). Traditions were held and were not to be altered.

LaVerdiere reviews the traditional scholarly view of development of the Didache in several redactional layers (LaVerdiere 1996, 132ff). The various sections are considered earlier or later based on how explicitly they discuss Christology. LaVerdiere thinks the ideas brought in at the different stages were not new. Their incorporation was intended to deal with particular problems the community had at the time (LaVerdiere 1996, 138). 

The eucharistic prayers, like other parts of the Didache, incorporate traditional materials (LaVerdiere 1996, 139). They surround a meal, which would have already been a meaningful context within a Jewish or early Christian community. LaVerdiere considers that the prayers from Didache 9-10 come from the early development of the community (LaVerdiere 1996, 139). These prayers fit into Jewish patterns, particularly a Kiddush and an Amidah (LaVerdiere 1996, 140). The prayers are simple and straightforward. In the second stage of the development of the community, still referring to chapters 9-10, LaVerdiere considers there to be some minimal insertion of Christological elements (LaVerdiere 1996, 141). Finally, LaVerdiere sees the material about true and false apostles and prophets, including what they do in the eucharist on the Lord's Day as development in the third stage (LaVerdiere 1996, 143). Though LaVerdiere is not convinced that this passage describes a eucharist as celebrated today, he does take the event to be, in the minds of the community, a eucharist, but that it was not understood in terms of the passion and resurrection of Christ, so was not "a real Eucharist" (LaVerdiere 1996, 145). 

​
0 Comments

Matthew and the Didache

2/10/2023

0 Comments

 
2/10/23
Scholarly Reflections

Massaux, Éduard. "Chapter Seven: The Didache." The Influence of the Gospel of Saint Matthew on Christian Literature before Saint Irenaeus: Book 3: The Apologists and the Didache. (Translated by Norman J. Belval and Suzanne Hecht. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1993, 144-182.

Though Massaux admits freely that dating of the Didache is unclear, he classes it with the later second century works. As he has done elsewhere, he begins with an evaluation of passages that show a strong relationship to Matthew's Gospel (Massaux 1993, 144). The opening line seems, in many ways, to continue directly from the command of Jesus i nMatthew 28:18-20, constituting what the apostles taught the nations. Though the Didache seems to come from an early time, Massaux notes tha at four points it refers  to "the gospel" and that it is at least tempting to understand that as reference to a written document. Massaux contends that there is a clear literary contact between the Didache and Matthew (Massaux 1993, 145).

Massaux begins his analysis with litearry contact between the Didache and Matthew's Sermon on the Mount (Massaux 1993, 145). The command to love God and the neighbor (1.2) is a clear echo of a biblical command. While Massaux finds the wording equally close to Matthew and Mark, he thinks it is drawn from Matthew, since elsewhere the author does not borrow from Mark (Massaux 1993, 146). This command is followed immediately by a negative statement of the Golden Rule, from Matthew 7:12. The wording is more similar to that of Matthew than to Luke (Massaux 1993, 147). Further, Massaux notes that, like Jesus in Matthew, the Didache ties the rule to two different ways, one of life and one of death. In Didache 1.3, then, the author speaks of blessing and praying for your opponents. Massaux finds parallels in Matthew and Luke, but not identity of wording (Massaux 1993, 147-148). This is the normal process for the Didache. Massaux observes, "whenever the author refers to the text of Mt, he does not cite it literally, except for the Lord's Prayer" (Massaux 1993, 149). A paraphrase is par for the course.

Didache 1.4 and 5a presents a number of slightly discrete commands. Massaux compares these with statements foudn in the Sermon on the Mount (Massaux 1993, 150-151). Based on similarity of vocabulary Massaux sees strong evidence of literary contact. As to the remainder of Didache 1.5, there is a strong similarity to Jesus' warning of Matthew 5:25-26.

Massaux observes that the Didache does not borrow woodenly from sources. The material leading up to Didache 3.7 follows a pattern of Hellenistic Jewish moralistic teaching with a list of vices, then contextualizes the list with an almost direct quote of Matthew 5:5, "the meek shall inherit the land" (Massaux 1993, 152-153). This demonstrates comfort on the part of the author. Massaux continues with 6.2 which artfully draws on Matthew 11:29-30; 19:21; and 5:48.

The Didache makes connections which are similar to those in Matthew. In chatper 8, where the Lord's Prayer is presented, it is placed in a very similar context and nearly identical form to that used in Matthew, as opposed to the usage in Luke (Massaux 1993, 154). 

In Didache 9.5 the author claims a quotation directly from the Lord. This specific statement is only in Matthew 7:6, "Do not give that which is holy to dogs" (Massaux 1993, 156). The context shows creativity, as the Didache speaks about teaching around the Eucharist which must be preserved. However, the quotation clearly shows dependence on Matthew. Another passage only found in Matthew speaks to the importance of reconciliation. It must be completed or the sacrifice/offering we bring is defiled (Massaux 1993, 156). Finally, Massaux observes that "prayers and alms" in Didache 15.4 strongly recalls Matthew chapter 6. Of importance is the reference to doing everything in accord with the "Gospel of our Lord." Because of the other references to passages in Matthew, Massaux takes the statement as a reference to a written Gospel account (Massaux 1993, 157).

Massaux next reviews passages from the Didache which are related to Matthew's Gospel but not the Sermon on the Mount. Didache 5.1-2 has a substantial catalogue of sins. Massaux provides a side-by-side chart of this passage, of Barnabas 20.1-2, and of statements from Matthew 15:19 and Mark 7:21 (Massaux 1993, 158-159). While there is some apparent contact with Matthew, the real similarities are between the Didache and Barnabas (Massaux 1993, 160). The same holds true for a catalogue of sinners which follows.

Didache 10.5-6 has multiple points of contact with Matthew. The arrangement suggests to Massaux a liturgical segment. The citations of Matthew are scattered broadly (Massaux 1993, 162).

Didache 11.3-9 again shows contact with various passages in Matthew. The instruction is to act toward apostles "according to the doctrine of the Gospel" (Massaux 1993, 163). While Massaux doesn't find any word for word quotation in the material, he finds many possible allusions. He reviews the five statements which follow individually (Massaux 1993, 164-166). Each shows some sign of literary contact with Matthew.

Didache 13.1-2 refers verbatim to Matthew 10:10, where the worker is worthy of his food (Massaux 1993, 166). Finally, in Didache 15.3 resolution of conflicts is very similar to Matthew 5:22 and especially Matthew 18:15-17 (Massaux 1993, 167). Massaux again sees evidence of the author of the Didache being familiar with, but not always quoting Matthew.

Massaux deals with Didache 16 verse by verse, identifying parallels in columns (Massaux 1993, 168ff). Because this chapter is less directly connected to my research interests I will not provide much detail of his investigation. The various statements show considerable relation the thought processes in Matthew.

Massaux finally moves briefly to texts which, while they may show a relationship to Matthew, he finds it doubtful (Massaux 1993, 174). Didache 2.1-3 speaks of a "second command" but it is not so much related to a first command of loving God and a second of love for neighbor. Didache 7.1 and 7.3 present a baptismal formula. The trinitarian formula, found in Matthew 28:19, is present. However, Massaux thinks the passage may have simply picked up the typical wording from common baptismal ritual (Massaux 1993, 175). Massaux concludes, then, that the author of the Didache was familiar with and even dependent on Matthew, though he did not reliably choose to make direct quotations (Massaux 1993, 175-176).

Massaux briefly reviews passages in which the Didache shows evidence of contact with other New Testament writings. An exception he notes is that the Didache does not seem influenced at all by Mark's Gospel (Massaux 1993, 177). Contact with Luke and John is minimal. Massaux does find a number of passages which may have some similarity in ideas to Acts, the Pauline epistles, the Petrine writings, and the general epistles, as well as Revelation. however, the passages are not lengthy, and are generally common ideas.

​
0 Comments

Literary Connections and Didache

2/1/2023

0 Comments

 
2/1/23
Scholarly Reflections

Jefford, Clayton. "Chapter Three: Related Investigations." The Sayings of Jesus in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Leiden: Brill, 1989, 93-145.

Jefford here asks whether Didache chaper six is more connected to chapters 1-5 or to chapters 7-15 (Jefford 1989, 93). He finds strong evidence for an influence of a source other than that of chapters 1-5, and particularly a source related to Paul. He takes from this a level of redaction which, unlike for chapters 1-5, had Paul's epistles as a source.

An important element to Jefford is the reference in Didache 6.2 to "the yoke of the Lord" (Jefford 1989, 95). While the word is used in Matthew 11:28-30, the context doesn't seem to point the same direction. In the Didache, the Christian is assumed to take on the yoke of the Lord in whatever way he is able. Didache 6.3 goes on to speak of food sacrificed to idols, a concept which first comes up in Paul (Rom. 14, 1 Cor. 8, 1 Cor. 10) (Jefford 1989, 96). The Didache speaks of this matter only briefly, while it is addressed at greater length in the biblical texts.

Jefford moves on to an exploration of Didache 6.2-3 and Acts 15:23-29 (Jefford 1989, 96ff). Paul's involvement in the council of Acts 15, and his interactions with the concept of the decree, suggests a connection between his thought and Didache 6 (Jefford 1989, 97).

Considering the connections between Paul's thought and that of the assumed redactor of Didache 6, Jefford speaks of the importance of world view in analysis of writings. Chaptesr 1-5 of the Didache can express an understanding of the community as part of established Judaism, while chapers 7-15 may see the community in terms of Hellenistic Christianity (Jefford 1989, 98). With this feature in mind, Jefford moves on to analyze the major sections of the Didache and probe the redactional worldviews.

In chapters 1-5, Jefford finds a rigid dualism, which he considers to be characteristic of much of Judaism and early Christianity (Jefford 1989, 100). The presence of the decalogue, but with significant alterations, refins the picture. In this, Jefford finds the cultural isolationism of Judaism when faced with opposition. The rpesece of some elements from early traditions about Jesus moves us to understand the community in terms of nascent Christianity which still considers Torah as its foundational code (Jefford 1989, 101).

In chapters 7-10 Jefford finds a shift from a concern of the creedal nature of the decalogue to a concern with correct ritual observance (Jefford 1989, 103). This shift is consistent with the early Christian move toward liturgical traditions, a pattern which Jefford finds in Paul (Jefford 1989, 104). Interestingly, Jefford applies the teaching requirement and the trinitarian formula of Didache 7 to this concept, understanding the liturgical element to be more important than what it represents (Jefford 1989, 104). Likewise, the prayers surrounding the eucharistic meal are treated as bearing importance, whihe the content of the meal and its underlying significance seems less important (Jefford 1989, 105). In this, Jefford says, "I disagree with the observation of Peters (Harvest, 492), who teands to see this eucharistic liturgy in the Didache as already 'fairly sophisticated.' Indeed, the perspective of the Didache is quite divergent from the 'Christ cult' idea of eucharist that is found both in the Pauline and in the Synoptic traditions" (Jefford 1989, 105, footnote, cf. Peters, Francis E. The Harvest of Hellenism: A History of the Near East from Alexander the Great to the Triumph of Christianity. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1970). The liturgical concern is accompanied by a lack of specific Christology, which moves Jefford to assign an early date to the Didache (Jefford 1989, 106). He further takes the material in chapters 7-10 as representing a ritual manner in which the precepts for chapters 1-5 could be applied.

Jefford identifies yet another change in worldview in Didache chapters 11-15 (Jefford 1989, 108). Here, the bishops, deacons, and resident prophets are discussed in their relationship to wandering apostles and prophets. Jefford sees here the development of a local identity and governing structure which, without direct reference to Torah, would be able to deal with external societal pressures (Jefford 1989, 109). The heart of dealing with these pressures is seen as holding to orthodox teaching. True prophets are to be recognized and false prophets are not. Overall, the chapters focus on a coherent social order within the community (Jefford 1989, 112). This is similar to chapters 1-5.

Jefford's next investigation deals with chapter 16 and 1.3b-2.1. Some commentators suggest the two passages belong to the same redactional layer, while others are less certain (Jefford 1989, 113). The passages contain relatively densely packed phrases and concepts which are clearly tied to New Testament material.

The question of a heirarchy within the community is significant. Jefford observes that Matthew makes some assumptions of heirarchy in ecclesiastical leadership (Jefford 1989, 118). Jefford sees Peter's role as a lead apostle to be a creation which emphasizes heirarchy and a departure from the Judaism which recognizes the educated elite (Jefford 1989, 119). Yet the Christian community stll has a heirarchy, with apostles, prophets, regular discioples, and others.

One of the puzzles in our attempts to harmonize the progress of early Christian development is the fact that the Didache identifies bishops and deacons, but not presbyters (Jefford 1989, 123). The role of a bishop could possibly be the same as that of a presbyter, with a distinction arising at a later date. Yet the term for presbyter, rooted in Judaism, would seem the most intuitive to use in a document with such clear Judaic roots (Jefford 1989, 124). A challenge which Jefford notes in all of the possible explanations of the heirarchy is that the instruction in the Didache is for the community, not the leaders, to baptize and appoint bishops and deacons (Jefford 1989, 125). The leaders are discussed in functional terms - what they do, rather than in terms of character. This is also a challenge, as one would assume the function of baptizing and appointing officials would belong to the officials (Jefford 1989, 127). This all contributes to a rather complex view of the community.

In his attempt to identify a community, Jefford suggests a set of Jewish-Gentile interactions around Antioch prior to 70 AD, as Christianity was growing and becoming distinct from Judaism (Jefford 1989, 128). Jefford then reviews salient issues in reconstructing the community. These include a tradition of the Decalog and Jewish wisdom and sayings traditions (Jefford 1989, 129). There are influences from a Matthean source, though not necessarily the Gospel (Jefford 1989, 130). There are certainly common elements in the thought of the Didache and of Matthew's Gospel. Jefford compares some specifically, in terms of review. Jewish and Gentile Christianity are not entirely in agreement (Jefford 1989, 133). Language and terminology usage are also similar. Jefford finds this to be the case particularly in regard to ritual and traditional elements, suggesting a strong affinity between the wo traditions (Jefford 1989, 135). Jefford particularly describes the similar views on baptism (Jefford 1989, 13), fasting, prayer (Jefford 1989, 137), and table fellowshiop (Jefford 1989, 138). As those have all been discussed earlier in this book, he presents them only in a brief summary here.

Jefford's overall conclusion is that the Didache uses sayings from a Jesus tradition and other early Judeo-Christian sources extensively (Jefford 1989, 142). He sees the work developed in several stages, gradually showing more sophisticated Christian theology.

​
0 Comments

Source and Purpose of Two Ways Texts

1/31/2023

0 Comments

 
1/31/23
Scholarly Reflections

Jefford, Clayton. "Chapter Two: Review of Texts." The Sayings of Jesus in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Leiden: Brill, 1989, 22-92.

Jefford observes that the opening of the Didache, asserting two differing ways, one of life and one of death, leads scholars to assume a source of information about the ways, one on which the first five chapters of the Didache would be predicated (Jefford 1989, 22). This has further led scholars to assume chapters 1-5 and possibly 16 are built on this source, and that the other chapters were created separately and later. Jefford notes that chapters 6-15 seem unrelated to chapters 1-5 and 16 (Jefford 1989, 23). The model of a source for the Two Ways material is made more clear by recognition of Two Ways material in  Barnabas which appears related but more likely in the manner of having a common source.

Jefford notes that dualism of a positive and negative way of life is common in both the Old Testament and the Apocrypha (Jefford 1989, 24). He further notes statements in Matthew 7:13-14 (Luke 13:23-24) which present the same idea. He finds it generally absent in Luke, which suggests to him a source in "the Matthean version of the Q saying" (Jefford 1989, 25). However, Jefford is not certain that in and of itself the Two Ways material is dualistic to the extent we might assume from the Synoptic Gospels. He takes it to be better informed by Old Testament wisdom passages (Jefford 1989, 26).

The fact that the baptismal materials in the Didache follows on the heels of the Two Ways suggests to many that the Two Ways serve as a dualistic catechesis (Jefford 1989, 26). Once one subscribes to the way of life he would be baptized. This seems reasonably consistent with Jewish patterns of catechesis, particularly as recorded in 1QS 3.13-4:26 (Jefford 1989, 27). However, Jefford takes the material to be more akin to an ethical gathering of community rules which may or may not be associated with baptism.

Jefford moves on to a comparison of Didache 1.2a-b with Matthew 22:37-39, Mark 12:30-31, and Luke 10:27, then Didache 1.20 with Matthew 7:12 and Luke 6:31, presenting Greek text in parallel columns (Jefford 1989, 29-30). His subsequent analysis is couched in terms of redactional choices of one word over another, possibly signaling a source for a reading. The investigation hopes to find a definitive source for the Didache's language of loving God and loving the neighbor (Jefford 1989, 31). The Gold Rule in Didache 1.2c is found in a negative form, common in Jewish and Hellenistic thought (Jefford 1989, 33). Jefford notes that the positive form, from Matthew and Luke, is the exception. Jefford suggests that the Didache normally depended on the Sayings Gospel Q, but that here the author consciously departs. Jefford further suggests at least three sources for the redactor (Jefford 1989, 34). The conclusion is that the Didachist must have borrowed consciously from some tradition other than Q, and that Matthew may have been a source for the double love command but not for the Golden Rule (Jefford 1989, 38).

Didache 1.3b-2.1 is a passage which sparks debate, as it is more distinctively Christian in nature and doesn't appear to be the result of a long strand of tradition (Jefford 1989, 39). Jefford considers each saying individually, attempting to trace a source and a role in the Didache as a whole, after his parallel comparison (Jefford 1989, 39-42). Again, it is not clear that specific language has been borrowed consistently from Matthew, Luke, or the hypothetical Q source (Jefford 1989, 43). Jefford does identify an association of ideas of praise, of prayer, and of fasting. This can be identified in veraious sources, on the level of ideas, if not in specific language usage (Jefford 1989, 44). Though the wording cannot be identified, Jefford continues to seek out scenarios by which it could have been derived. Jefford's analysis of giving from Didache 1.5 follows the same pattern (Jefford 1989, 48ff). The saying of 1.6 follows (Jefford 1989, 51ff), likewise yielding an opinion that the saying was probably common within early Christianity but that a source can't be positively identified for the exact wording.

Jefford continues with an analysis of Didache 2.2-7, which he considers an older level of the text (Jefford 1989, 53). He evaluates the possibility of the material being drawn from an Old Testament text or possibly some later source, modified to serve Christian purposes (Jefford 1989, 54). As before, Jefford presents chunks of parallel text and analyzes them. The material is generally tied to the Decalog, however, it shows expansion and rearrangement (Jefford 1989, 56). Again, while Jefford finds conceptual parallels in various places, he doesn't find sources for exact wording, and assigns the work to a redactor who drew from numerous sources, adjusting them all (Jefford 1989, 61-62).

As Jefford movs into Didache chapter three he finds the material to serve as protection for the principles in chapter two (Jefford 1989, 63). A significant feature is the presence of two separate lists of admonitions, one of which has a parallel in Banabas 19.7. Didache 3.2-6 has no parallel in Barnabas and is arranged in a "strophic pattern that is not revealed elsewhere in the Didache" (Jefford 1989, 64). The concepts are generally assumed to be drawn from Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 5, and Matthew 5. Jefford observes that this emphasis on the Mosaic Law as a given suggests a time period before the rise of substantial Gentile Christianity (Jefford 1989, 68). Verses 8-10, with a strong parallel in Barnabas 19.3-6, suggest use of a source common to the Didache and Barnabas (Jefford 1989, 69). Jefford evaluates the statements which are prallel in the two documents. The statement of 3.7 "be meek…" has a clear parallel in Psalm 37 and Matthew 5 (Jefford 1989, 73). Jefford sees the realization that poor people should be cared for as a relatively late concept. The statement in Matthew 5 has an alteration in structure, which Jefford thinks disconnects it from Didache 3.7 (Jefford 1989, 75-76). In the end, Jefford concludes that the concept was meaningful within the community and that the Didachist sought the passage out in Psalm 37 or in whatever text served as a source for Matthew 5.5 (Jefford 1989, 80-81).

As Didache 3 served as a protective fence around the Decalog, Jefford finds chapters 4-5 to serve as another fence (Jefford 1989, 81). In chapters 4-5, the catechumen is presented with positive attitudes and behaviors which will keep him from entering into sin (Jefford 1989, 82). Jefford finds extensive parallels with Barnabas 19-20, but not with Matthew. Much of the ordering is similar to that of  Barnabas, but the Didache contains a number of elements which are not present in Barnabas (Jefford 1989, 83-84).

Jefford finally visits Didache 16, the apocalyptic passage (Jefford 1989, 85ff). He finds the task of tracing Old Testament or other Jewish foundations unclear, but finds numerous parallels for the ideas within the Synoptic traditions. Jefford's parallel comparison of texts underlines the difficulty of finding parallel wording among these passages (Jefford 1989, 85-87). This leads Jefford to suggest a dependence on a source which would have been available both to the Didachist and the Synoptic redactors (Jefford 1989, 88). Jefford briefly tips his hat to the presence of oral tradition, but his effort as a whole is focused on a literary model (Jefford 1989, 90). In conclusion, Jefford finds thematic and structural similarity with other texts but cannot identify a specific source for the material in Didache 1-6 and 16. He assumes it to be a source which was also used for other materials. 

0 Comments

Where Did the Didache Come From?

1/30/2023

0 Comments

 
1/30/23
Scholarly Reflections

Jefford, Clayton. "Chapter One: Introduction." The Sayings of Jesus in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Leiden: Brill, 1989, 1-21.

Jefford describes the time of the discovery of the Didache as a time when biblical scholarship was moving into new and exciting fields of inquiry (Jefford 1989, 1). The Didache represented a document which tied the inquiries into biblical texts and patristic history together. In the rush of studies, Jefford observes that dating and origin of the text has not been resolved adequately, leaving students to build further theories about the Didache on a foundation which is not stable (Jefford 1989, 2).

Assumptions of date and origin have centered around the sayings found in Didache chapters 1-5 and 16 (Jefford 1989, 3). The content of the sayings is normally assumed to be found in Didache 7-15, which may represent the last stage of the composition process. Jefford says of the methodology, "Rarely are the sayings examined and then dated according to their own merits, and rarely is the nature of that community which produced the Didache judged according to the traditio-historical and sociological parameters under which these sayings materials appeared" (Jefford 1989, 4). In other words, the sayings are not considered as important in their own right.

Jefford goes on to discuss the three main schools of thought about the text of the Didache. In the French school, Sabatier (1885) took it to be a church manual which shows extensive signs of early Judaic Christianity and which antedated Paul's epistles (Jefford 1989, 4). Massaux (1950) suggested an influence of Matthew upon the Didache. Audet (1958), on the other hand, rejected an influence of the Synoptic Gospels and argued for an earlier date, while identifying three stages of redaction (Jefford 1989, 5). Since that time, Stanislas Giet, Willy Rordorf, and André Tuilier have further emphasized an early date and a Syrian origin, possibly in Antioch (Jefford 1989, 6).

The German school, represented first by Harnack (1884), sees the text as influenced by four sources, including "the Old Testament; . . . the Gospel of the Egyptians; the Epistle of Barnabas; and, the Shepherd of Hermas" (Jefford 1989, 7). Harnack placed the text after 120, originating in Egypt. Others substituted other sources of "gospel" information. Some have suggested a knowledge of various New Testament texts (Jefford 1989, 8). The sources postulated have led German scholars to a date in the second century, though in 1957 Helmut Köster made a persuasive argument for dependence on oral, rather than written, tradition. This could push the date somewhat earlier as the emergence of written sources would not be necessary (Jefford 1989, 10).

British and American scholarship has been mixed as regards date and origin of the Didache (Jefford 1989, 11). They have largely agreed that there is a strong Jewish element and, for the most part, have suggested a relationship with Barnabas, Hermas, and Matthew (Jefford 1989, 12). Many have taken the work to be early second century and to have drawn on some sort of a Gospel harmony. The polity which could lead to the community described seems archaic in nature, particularly the view of the episcopacy (Jefford 1989, 13). Dating was a matter of discussion through the first half of the 20th century, with scholars searching out possible influences which could be dated. This has resulted in suggestions ranging from the late first century to the fourth century (Jefford 1989, 15).

Jefford notes that recent studies of newly discovered manuscript traditions, such as the the Nag Hammadi and Qumran materials, have urged investigation into the interaction of ideas in the world of the first century. The Didache may belong among this material, but scholars have made assumptions about date and provenance without adequate background information (Jefford 1989, 18). He suggests that a number of the assumptions deserve careful questioning and clarification. Specifically, Jefford intends to survey the different "sayings" material so as to attempt to understand a source and how these materials fit into the Didache and the early church.

​
0 Comments

Origins of Eucharistic Prayers

1/27/2023

0 Comments

 
1/27/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Five: Prehistory of the Eucharistic Prayers." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 159-171.

Voöbus closes his book with an attempt to trace the origins of the eucharistic prayers, which strike him as being "very archaic" in some elements (Voöbus 1968, 159). Terms such as "the vine of David," the reference to "the Name," and the idea of God "tabernacling" with His people are among these. The elements seem to indicate Jewish thought, including that of the earliest Christian groups. Voöbus takes this to be the case especially in the designation "Servant" for Jesus (Voöbus 1968, 160).

Though it is tempting to take the prayers as adapted Jewish table prayers for an agape meal, this is not acceptable to Voöbus. He is not sure we could prove that Christian liturgical needs could be supplied by Hellenistic Judaism, a proposition which has not been well demonstrated (Voöbus 1968, 161). Moreover, the entire proposition is based on drawing material from different sources bit by bit rather than the more natural composition of new material inspired by older material.

Rather than follow this pathway, Voöbus looks for actual conceptual background elements. The prayer over the cup follows the pattern of a traditional Jewish thanksgiving over a cup. However, in the Didache it has been thoroughly re-purposed to reflect on the gift of salvation in Christ (Voöbus 1968, 163). Likewise, the prayer over the bread takes its start from a Jewish thanksgiving. However, here it is so repurposed the bread is not important. Rather, the invisible gifts of God are at the center (Voöbus 1968, 164). The significance of God's dwelling among his people is similarly present in Jewish thought but it has been amplified in Christian thought to the point of God not only dwelling in the temple but in the blievers (Voöbus 1968, 164). Again, the work of God to draw people into unity is clearly a Jewish idea. However, it now takes on a spiritual significance, with the unity being on the spiritual plane rather than the physical (Voöbus 1968, 165).

The prayer of Didache 10.5 has been compared with the Jewish Birkat hamazon, but Voöbus observes in the Didache there is an introductory fomula which is not found in conjunction with the Jewish prayer (Voöbus 1968, 166). He concludes that the prayer is not borrowed, though the schema is familiar from Jewish thought. It bears a resemblance to a zekor from the Hebrew Psalter (Voöbus 1968, 167). The pattern, which would have been a well knwon form, was adapted, but adapted thoroughly to Christian use (Voöbus 1968, 168).

​
0 Comments

Eucharist as a Gathering

1/26/2023

1 Comment

 
1/26/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Four: The Source of Didache IX.4." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 137-157.

The history of the liturgical prayer in Didache 9.4 has been a matter of some debate. Voöbus discusses a presumption that there is a relationship between John's Gospel and the Didache, which might help understand the context of the prayer (Voöbus 1968, 137). However, as Voöbus describes, if the concept of gathering the scattered grain in the Didache comes from Jesus' gathering of he bread fragments from feeding the multitude, the entire message is changed. It ecomes no longer a sign of unity but a sign of multiplied provision (Voöbus 1968, 138). To evaluate the passage, Voöbus takes the elements one at a time.

The grain, in Didache 9.4, is viewed as "scattered." The critical argument which associates this with John says that in John 11:52 the people are described as scattered (Voöbus 1968, 139). The word is not in doubt, but its meaning might be. In Matthew 25:24, the same word is used in a sense of "sowing" or "planting." This is a sharply different metaphor, as planting is a purposeful placement of seed. Taking it solely as a destructive dispersal is unwarranted (Voöbus 1968, 140).

Didache 9.4 further says the grain is "gathered" in the bread. Because the term can be used of many stages of the progress from standing grain to having bread, Voöbus is hesitant to declare a clear equivalent with the use in John (Voöbus 1968, 141). In a wide variety of early Christian writings, the gathering into one is not used for picking up fragments to put them in a basket (Voöbus 1968, 142).

Didache 9.4 speaks of the grain scattered "in the mountains." The scholarship which attempts to find parallels with John looks to John 6:3, where the setting is on a mountain (Voöbus 1968, 144). Voöbus observes that the mention of mountains in the two passages serves a completely different function. The image does not create any sort of parallel, a fact which forcefully undermines the argument for dependence (Voöbus 1968, 145).

The word "fragment" used in Didache 9.4 is used to suggest dependence on John. The Didache uses it in the singular, while John describes multiple fragments. Of greater importance to Voöbus is the fact that the parallel in Apostolic Constitutions uses ἄρτος (bread) rather thank κλάσμα (fragment) (Voöbus 1968, 147). This move suggests that any influence of John didn't seem strong over time. In fact, "bread" is typically used rather than "fragment." Voöbus concludes that the Didache reading is the secondary use, rather than a primary (Voöbus 1968, 148).

In conclusion, Voöbus finds that the gathering in John is looked at from a completely different orientation than that in Didache 9. He does not think there is adequate evidence for dependence (Voöbus 1968, 149). The subjects are not the same.

Voöbus concedes that there are significant "affinities" between the Didache ajd John's Gospel (Voöbus 1968, 152). There are many characteristic terms in common. Yet Voöbus maintains the terms and even metaphors which are used to describe early Christianity will rather naturally appear in multiple works (Voöbus 1968, 153). Their roots likely exist throughout the underlying concepts of Christianity which antedate all these documents. Voöbus takes the concepts of the Lord's Supper to be among these early liturgical drivers of metaphor and vocabulary (Voöbus 1968, 156). 

​
1 Comment

Images in the Eucharist

1/25/2023

0 Comments

 
1/25/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Three: Eucharistic Imagery." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 113-135.

Voöbus finds a number of interesting themes within the eucharistic portions of the Didache. In this chapter he explores seven of them. First, 10.1 speaks of God's name tabernacled in our hearts. Voöbus takes the concept to already be archaic, based on the way it is referred to (Voöbus 1968, 113). Voöbus understands reference to the "Name" as a claim of Christ, who here is the world's creator (Voöbus 1968, 114). Interestingly, Voöbus does not connect the concept of "Name" with the Trinitarian formula, as many have done in an analysis of baptism. On the contrary, he urges caution in interpretation. It may be an instance of eisegesis to read additional concepts into the prayer (Voöbus 1968, 116). Rather, we may need to be content with a simple understanding of the Name o God as His self revelation. We are not told what aspect of His self-revelation is to be our focus, but we know He is present (Voöbus 1968, 117). Voöbus further concludes that God's presence is in us, as well as in the rest of creation (Voöbus 1968, 119). In practical terms, then, God's presence in His people draws them to unity in their hope of eternal life.

In addition to the gift of life, the thanksgiving over the loaf acknowledges knowledge as a gift (Voöbus 1968, 120). This is a concept fraught with problems, as Voöbus acknowledges. While we embrace the value of knowledge, the term became a catchword which described the Gnostic heresies (Voöbus 1968, 121). Yet in the Didache there is no hint of Gnosticism. The knowledge is mediated by the presence of the Messiah, not by our special enlightenment.

A third concept is that of life, also acknowledged in the first thanksgiving over bread as a gift from the Father (Voöbus 1968, 122). Life here is eternal, bringing us immortality. Voöbus notes that eternal life is not a concept found in Jewish prayers. However, it is clearly associated with the eucharist. Voöbus even associates it "as a catchword for all that the Christian religion embodies" (Voöbus 1968, 123). Of importance is that the life is not pictured as future, but as already present.

Fourth, Voöbus discusses the concept of "the vine of David," which he considers "very archaic" (Voöbus 1968, 124). The term, which is relatively obscure, may refer to the Messianic role of Jesus, the son of David. Yet, Voöbus does not take it to refer to Jesus (Voöbus 1968, 125). It rather seems to be a gift brought or manifested by Him, but distinct from Him. The vine typically served as an image of Israel or the process of the history of salvation. Voöbus finds this as a common symbol in Judaism (Voöbus 1968, 125). The imagery in early Christianity was of the Christian community replacing Judaism (Voöbus 1968, 126). This is applied to the eucharist in the passage.

A fifth concept is that of perfection, as the prayer is that God would perfect His people in His love (Voöbus 1968, 126). Voöbus considers this text to require us to consider "perfection" in biblical and Semitic terms rather than through Greek philosophy. "[I]t is a purely religious term for total devotion to the way of God" (Voöbus 1968, 127). As God purifies His people, they grow as a community which is obedient to Him. The concepts of holiness, perfection, and God's love are clearly linked not only in the Didache but also in the Fourth Gospel, which is of interest to Voöbus (Voöbus 1968, 128).

Sixth, Voöbus notes the centrality of unity in the eucharist. Within the whole prayer, the unity of the church is a recurring theme (Voöbus 1968, 129). Gathering people as the grain of many hills is gathered in bread is a striking image. Voöbus sees this not in the Gnostic view of scattered souls being enlightened but rather in the view of the remnant of Israel dispersed and then gathered (Voöbus 1968, 130). The whole community of the church is gathered as God's remnant.

Voöbus finally directs us to consider the overall profile of the eucharistic passages (Voöbus 1968, 132). Of note, the rite seems to have no focus on the body and blood of Jesus, but rather on the unity of His people. The sacrifice of Jesus is absent (Voöbus 1968, 133). As eucharistic liturgy developed, this apparent oversight was quickly brought in. At the time of the Didache, the thanksgiving was for being together in Christ, receiving His gifs (Voöbus 1968, 134). 

​
0 Comments
<<Previous

    ​Help Fuel This Ministry by Clicking Here!

    All the work of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry, including this blog, is supported by the generosity of people like you. Please consider joining our team of prayer and financial supporters. Read more here!
    Please Note: The opinions presented in blog posts are not necessarily those of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry. Frequently we report on contrary views, often without comment. Please chime in on the discussion.

    About Throwing Inkwells

    When Martin Luther was dealing with struggles in his life he once saw what appeared to be an angelic being. Not trusting that he was going to be informed by someone other than the God revealed in Scripture, he took the appearance to be untrustworthy and hurled his inkwell at it. The chipped place in the plaster wall is still visible at the Wartburg Castle, though apparently the ink stain on the wall has been refreshed periodically by the caretaker.

    Blog Feeds

    RSS Feed

    Want to keep up with what's happening at Wittenberg Door? Subscribe to our mailing list!

    Categories

    All
    1 Corinthians
    1 John
    1 Kings
    1 Peter
    1 Samuel
    1 Thessalonians
    1 Timothy
    2019-02-feb
    2 Chronicles
    2 Corinthians
    2-john
    2 Kings
    2 Peter
    2 Samuel
    2 Thessalonians
    2 Timothy
    3-john
    Academic-success
    Acts
    Advent 1
    Advent-1-a
    Advent-1b
    Advent-1c
    Advent 2
    Advent-2-a
    Advent-2b
    Advent-2c
    Advent 3
    Advent-3-a
    Advent-3b
    Advent-3c
    Advent 4
    Advent-4-a
    Advent-4b
    Advent-4c
    Akagi 2016
    Alesso-2009
    Alexander 1999
    Allegory
    Allitt-2010
    All Saints' Day
    Alon 1996
    Amos
    Anaphora
    Anointing
    Antioch
    Anunciation
    Apollinaris Of Hierapolis
    Apostolical Constitutions
    Aristides Of Athens
    Aristotle
    Aryeh 2021
    Ascension Day
    Ash Wednesday
    Athenagoras Of Athens
    Audet 1996
    Augustine
    Bakker 1993
    Balabanski 1997
    Bammel 1996
    Baptism
    Baptism Of Christ
    Baptism-of-the-lord-b
    Bardy 1938
    Baron 2019
    Baron & Maponya 2020
    Bauckham 1984
    Bauckham 2006
    Bauckham 2007
    Beale 1984
    Belief
    Belonging
    Ben-Amos 1999
    Betz 1996
    Biesenthal 1893
    Bigg 1904
    Bigg 1905
    Blogcation
    Blomberg 1984
    Boehme-2010
    Botha 1967
    Botha 1993
    Braaten 2007
    Bruce1988
    Bruce-1988
    Bryennios
    Butler 1960
    Caneday 2017
    Canonicity
    Capon1998
    Capon-1998
    Carr 2010
    Carson-1991
    Carson-moo-2005
    Catechesis
    Catholicism
    Cerfaux 1959
    Chilton 1984
    Chrismation
    Christmas-1b
    Christmas-1c
    Christmas Dawn
    Christmas-day
    Christmas Eve
    Christmas Midnight
    Chronicles
    Circumcision And Naming Of Christ
    Cody 1995
    Colossians
    Conditions
    Confession Of Peter
    Confessions
    Connolly 1932
    Connolly 1933
    Connolly 1934
    Constanza-2013
    Cooper & Lioy 2018
    Costa 2021
    Court 1981
    Culley 1986
    Cyprian
    Daly 1978
    Daniel
    Danielou 1956
    Davids 1984
    Davis 1995
    DeHalleux 1996
    Dehandschutter 1995
    Deuteronomy
    Didache
    Diversity
    Divine Fellowship
    Dix 1933
    Dix2005
    Dix-2005
    Doane 1994
    Draper
    Draper 1984
    Draper 1989
    Draper 1995
    Draper-1996
    Draper-1997
    Draper-2000
    Draper-2006
    Draper 2008
    Dube 2016
    Due 2003
    Early Christian Functionaries
    Easter-2
    Easter-2a
    Easter2b
    Easter-2c
    Easter-3
    Easter-3a
    Easter-3b
    Easter-3c
    Easter-4
    Easter-4a
    Easter-4b
    Easter-4c
    Easter-5
    Easter-5a
    Easter-5b
    Easter-6
    Easter-6a
    Easter-6b
    Easter-6c
    Easter-7
    Easter-7a
    Easter-7b
    Easter-7c
    Easter-b
    Easter-day
    Easter-monday
    Easter-sunday-a
    Easter-sunday-c
    Easter-sunrise
    Easter-tuesday
    Easter-wednesday
    Ecclesiastes
    Eleutheria2014
    Elman-1999
    Ephesians
    Epiphany
    Epiphany-1c
    Epiphany-2-a
    Epiphany-2c
    Epiphany-3-a
    Epiphany-3b
    Epiphany-3c
    Epiphany-4-a
    Epiphany-4b
    Epiphany-4c
    Epiphany-5-a
    Epiphany-5b
    Epiphany-5c
    Epiphany-6-a
    Epiphany-6c
    Epiphany-7-a
    Epiphany-c
    Epistle Of Barnabas
    Esther
    Ethics
    Eucharist
    Eve-of-the-circumcision-of-christ
    Exodus
    Exodus-20
    Experiential Reading
    Eybers 1975
    Ezekiel
    Ezra
    Fagerberg1988
    Fagerberg-1988
    Fall Of Jerusalem
    Farrell-1987
    Flew-2007
    Flusser-1996
    Forde-2007
    Fraade-1999
    France-2007
    Galatians
    Garrow 2004
    Gender
    Genesis
    Gero 1977
    Gibbins 1935
    Gibbs 2006
    Glover-1958
    Goga & Popa 2019
    Gonzalez-2010
    Good-friday
    Gospels
    Greek
    Grosvener-schaff-1885
    Grosvenor-1884
    Guardian-of-jesus
    Habakkuk
    Haggai
    Hagner 1984
    Harnack-1884
    Harrington 2008
    Harris 1887
    Harris 1984
    Hartin 2008
    Hearon 2004
    Hearon 2010
    Hebrews
    Heilmann 2018
    Henderson1992
    Henderson-1992
    Henderson 1995
    Hezser 2010
    History
    Hoffman-1986
    Holy Cross Day
    Holy-innocents
    Holy-saturday
    Horsley 2010
    Hosea
    Hutchens2013
    Hymes-1994
    Ignatius Of Antioch
    Infertility
    Isaiah
    Jaffee-1999
    James
    James Of Jerusalem
    James The Elder
    Jefford 1989
    Jefford 1995
    Jeffreys-1986
    Jeremiah
    Jerome
    Jewish Christianity
    Job
    Joel
    John
    Jonah
    Jones & Mirecki 1995
    Joseph
    Joshua
    Judaism
    Jude
    Judges
    Jungmann-1959
    Justin Martyr
    Kelber-1987
    Kelber-1995
    Kelber 2002
    Kelber 2010
    Kelber & Sanders 2010
    Kevil
    Kings
    Kleinig-2013
    Kloppenborg 1979
    Kloppenborg 1995
    Kloppenborg 2008
    Koch2010
    Kok 2015
    Kolb2000
    Kolb-2000
    Kolbarand2008
    Kolb-arand-2008
    Konradt 2008
    Kurekchomycz2009
    Lake 1905
    Lamentations
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-a
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-b
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-c
    Last Supper
    LaVerdiere 1996
    Law
    Layton 1968
    Lectionary
    Lent-1
    Lent-1-a
    Lent-1b
    Lent-1c
    Lent-2
    Lent-2-a
    Lent-2b
    Lent-2c
    Lent-3
    Lent-3-a
    Lent-3b
    Lent-3c
    Lent-4
    Lent-4-a
    Lent-4b
    Lent-4c
    Lent-5
    Lent-5-a
    Lent-5b
    Lent-5c
    Lessing2014
    Lessing-2014
    Leviticus
    Lincoln-1885
    Lindemann 1997
    Literary Character
    Liturgy
    Livesey 2012
    Long-2009
    Lord-1986
    Lord-1987
    Lord's Prayer
    Love
    Luke
    Luther
    Maas-2014
    Maccoull-1999
    Maier 1984
    Malachi
    Manuscripts
    Mark
    Marty-2016
    Martyrdom Of John The Baptist
    Martyrs
    Mary Magdalene
    Mary Mother Of Our Lord
    Mason-1998
    Massaux 1993 (1950)
    Matthew
    Matthias
    Mazza 1995
    Mazza-1996
    Mazza 1999
    Mbamalu 2014
    McDonald 1980
    McDonnell & Montague 1991
    McKean 2003
    Mcknight-2014
    Micah
    Middleton 1935
    Milavec 1995
    Milavec-2003
    Milavec2012
    Miller 2019
    Missional
    Mitch-2010
    Mitchell 1995
    Molina-evers-1998
    Monday-in-holy-week
    Montenyohl-1993
    Morris-1992
    Motyer-1993
    Mueller-2006
    Muilenburg 1929
    Music
    Nahum
    Nehemiah
    Neufeld-1999
    Newsletter
    Newtestament
    New Testament
    Niditch-1995
    Niditch 2003
    Niebuhr 1956
    Niederwimmer-1982
    Niederwimmer 1995
    Niederwimmer-1996
    Numbers
    Oaths
    Obadiah
    Oldtestament
    Old Testament
    Olsen-1986
    Ong-1987
    Ong-1988
    Ong-1995
    Oralit
    Orality
    Ordination
    Orphan-hosting
    Osborne-2002
    Osborne-2013
    Overman 2008
    Ozment1980
    Ozment-1980
    Palm-sunday
    Palm-sunday-a
    Palm-sunday-c
    Pardee 1995
    Parks-1986
    Passionb
    Patterson 1995
    Paul
    Pearce-1993
    Pentateuch
    Pentecost-10a
    Pentecost-10b
    Pentecost-10c
    Pentecost-11a
    Pentecost-11b
    Pentecost-11c
    Pentecost-12a
    Pentecost-12b
    Pentecost-12c
    Pentecost-13a
    Pentecost-13b
    Pentecost13c
    Pentecost-13c
    Pentecost-14a
    Pentecost-14b
    Pentecost-14c
    Pentecost-15
    Pentecost-15a
    Pentecost-15b
    Pentecost-15c
    Pentecost-16
    Pentecost-16a
    Pentecost-16b
    Pentecost-16c
    Pentecost-17a
    Pentecost-17b
    Pentecost 17C
    Pentecost-18a
    Pentecost-18b
    Pentecost 18 C
    Pentecost-19a
    Pentecost-19b
    Pentecost 19 C
    Pentecost-1a
    Pentecost-20a
    Pentecost-20b
    Pentecost 20 C
    Pentecost-21a
    Pentecost-21b
    Pentecost 21 C
    Pentecost-22a
    Pentecost-22b
    Pentecost 22 C
    Pentecost-23a
    Pentecost-23b
    Pentecost 23 C
    Pentecost-24a
    Pentecost-24b
    Pentecost-24-c
    Pentecost-25b
    Pentecost-25-c
    Pentecost-26b
    Pentecost-26-c
    Pentecost-2a
    Pentecost-2b
    Pentecost-2c
    Pentecost-3a
    Pentecost-3b
    Pentecost-3c
    Pentecost-4a
    Pentecost-4b
    Pentecost-4c
    Pentecost-5a
    Pentecost-5b
    Pentecost-5c
    Pentecost-6a
    Pentecost-6b
    Pentecost-6c
    Pentecost-7a
    Pentecost-7b
    Pentecost-7c
    Pentecost-8a
    Pentecost-8b
    Pentecost-8c
    Pentecost-9a
    Pentecost-9b
    Pentecost-9c
    Pentecost-b
    Pentecost-c
    Pentecost Eve
    Pentecost Monday
    Pentecost Sunday
    Pentecost Tuesday
    Petersen 1994
    Peterson2010
    Peterson 2010
    Philemon
    Philippians
    Philosophy
    Picirilli 1988
    Pick 1908
    Pieper1924
    Pieper 1924
    Pieper 1968
    Piper 1947
    Pluralism
    Post 70
    Powell 2000
    Prayer
    Preaching
    Presentation Of Our Lord
    Proctor 2019
    Proper-19c
    Proper-20c
    Proper 21C
    Proper 22C
    Proper 23C
    Proper 24C
    Proper 25C
    Proper 26C
    Proper 27C
    Proper 28C
    Prophets
    Proverbs
    Psalm
    Psalms
    Purity
    Quinquagesima
    Quintilian
    Rabbinic Character
    Real Presence
    Receptivity
    Reed 1995
    Reformation
    Reformation Day
    Reinhartz 2018
    Repschinski 2008
    Resurrection
    Revelation
    Rhetoric
    Rhoads 2010
    Richardson & Gooch 1984
    Riggs 1995
    Ritual Meal
    Romans
    Rordorf 1996
    Rosenberg 1986
    Rosenberg 1987
    Rosenfeld-levene-2012
    Rueger-2016
    Russo 1994
    Ruth
    Sacrament
    Sacrifice
    Saenger 1999
    Sailhamer1992
    Sailhamer-1992
    Sale 1996
    Samuel
    Scaer2004
    Scaer-2004
    Schaff 1886
    Schaff 1888
    Schaff 1889
    Schaff 2014
    Schaff-2014
    Schollgen
    Schroter 2008
    Schwarz 2005
    Scriptural Usage
    Seeliger 1996
    Septuagesima
    Sermon
    Sexagesima
    Sim 2008
    Simon And Jude
    Smith-2009
    Smith 2018
    Sommerville-2006
    Songofsongs
    St. Andrew
    Stark 1997
    St. Barnabas
    St. Bartholomew
    Stewart-Sykes 2008
    St. John
    St. John The Baptist
    St Luke
    St Mark
    St Matthew
    St. Matthias
    St Michael And All Angels
    St. Paul
    St. Peter And Paul
    St Philip And St James
    Strawbridge 2017
    St. Stephen
    St. Thomas
    St. Titus
    Sunday Of The Passion
    Tatian
    Taylor 1888
    TDNT
    Teaching
    Telfer 1939
    Tertullian
    Textual Comparison
    Textual Integrity
    Theophilos 2018
    Theophilus Of Antioch
    Thielman 2010
    Thursday In Holy Week
    Timothy
    Titus
    Tomson 2008
    Transfiguration
    Transfiguration-a
    Transfigurationb
    Transfiguration-c
    Trinity 1
    Trinity 10
    Trinity 11
    Trinity 12
    Trinity 13
    Trinity 14
    Trinity 15
    Trinity 16
    Trinity 17
    Trinity 18
    Trinity 19
    Trinity 2
    Trinity 20
    Trinity 21
    Trinity 22
    Trinity 23
    Trinity 3
    Trinity 4
    Trinity 5
    Trinity 6
    Trinity 7
    Trinity 8
    Trinity 9
    Trinity-a
    Trinity-b
    Trinity-c
    Trinity Sunday
    Tsang 2009
    Tuckett
    Tuesday In Holy Week
    Tuilier 1995
    Twelftree 1984
    Two Ways
    Ty 19
    Vahrenhurst 2008
    Van Der Merwe 2017
    Van Der Merwe 2019
    Van Der Watt 2008
    Van De Sandt 2002
    Van De Sandt 2007
    Van De Sandt 2008
    Van-de-sandt-2010
    Van-de-sandt-2011
    Van De Sandt & Flusser 2002
    Van Deventer 2021
    Varner 2005
    Vatican II
    Veith1993
    Veith-1993
    Veith-sutton-2017
    Verheyden 2008
    Vikis-Freibergs 1997
    Visitation
    Voobus 1968
    Voobus 1969
    Vows
    Warfield 1886
    Wasson & Toelken 1998
    Wednesday In Holy Week
    Wenham 1984
    Wenham 1992
    Weren 2008
    Weston-2009
    Wilson2011
    Wilson-2011
    Wilson20113470b5cf10
    Winger 2014
    Wischmeyer 2008
    Wolmarans 2005
    Wright 1984
    Young 2011
    Ysebaert-2002
    Zangenberg 2008
    Zechariah
    Zephaniah
    Zetterholm 2008

Proudly powered by Weebly