Early Jewish Christian Research Articles

"The midst of the earth”: Ps. 73:12b (LXX) in Patristic and Liturgical Understanding

The verse “You have wrought salvation in the midst of the earth” (Ps. 74/73:12) occurs in numerous liturgical texts. This article examines how this verse has been understood by patristic authors from circa third to fifth centuries. The Hebrew original and its Jewish interpretations focus on God’s salvific acts in the world, in the eyes of all peoples, while the Septuagint allows a more punctual understanding “in the centre of the world”. The latter option was utilised immediately after the construction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, as Golgotha became the solemn centre of Christian pilgrimage and was widely recognised as the centre of the earth in theological and cosmological terms. Therefore, the verse became much used in liturgical celebrations related to the cross, as witnessed already in the Typikon of Mar Saba.
 Moreover, the idea of Golgotha as axis mundi was soon applied in colourful ways regarding traditions related to the creation and burial of Adam, sacrifice of Isaac, and even eschatological visions. Excitingly, these interpretations have evident predecessors in Judaism and in the early Jewish Christian beliefs and practices. All this guarantees that the verse is one of the richest dictums in liturgical life in terms of theological, mythic, and historical connotations.

The Jewishness of Luke–Acts: Locating Lukan Christianity Amidst the Parting of The Ways

Abstract This article surveys historic and recent contributions to the study of the situation of Luke–Acts and the so-called ‘parting of the ways’ between Judaism and Christianity to advance the thesis that these two avenues of inquiry, which have generally been pursued independently, need to be studied in tandem. The article considers stylistic and theological features of Luke–Acts to argue that this corpus was written either by a Hellenistic Jewish Christian or else a Gentile Godfearer whose entrance into the Christian community was mediated heavily by an attachment to synagogue life. The article further argues that the Luke’s portrayal of Jews suggests that the author writes from a context in which the mission to the Jews is ongoing and with a rhetorical aim to persuade non-Christian Jews, either directly among a Jewish readership or indirectly by inculcating a posture of missionary appeal among Christian readers. Finally, the article argues that the Gentile mission in Acts is narrated with a view toward assuaging Jewish-Christian concerns. Taken together, these arguments propose a complex setting for Luke–Acts within a Jewish and Christian cultural milieu and suggest that the Lukan corpus remains an important textual field for research into early Jewish–Christian relations.

Überlegungen zu ausgewählten Aspekten der Behandlung des Jeremiabuchs in der Monographie von Benjamin Ziemer „Kritik des Wachstumsmodells“ (2020)

Abstract In a massive study, Benjamin Ziemer has launched a scathing stricture of redaction criticism in Old Testament studies. Based on comparative material from an impressive range of Ancient Near Eastern, biblical, early Jewish and early Christian literature, he maintains that diachronic research is unable to deliver meaningful reconstructions that reach more than one stage of textual development behind the present biblical text. Moving beyond that boundary would amount to unfettered speculation. While his appraisal is overwhelmingly negative, there is one biblical book on which he endeavors to devise a redaction-critical hypothesis of his own: the book of Jeremiah. The article evaluates Ziemer’s theory on Jeremiah and draws some general conclusions regarding the validity of his verdict on traditional redaction-critical research.

Are Hominins Special? Human Origins as the Image and Likeness of God

ABSTRACT The recent discovery of a number of non-human hominin species who, as language, technology, and culture-bearing beings, lived both before and as contemporaries with early anatomically modern humans, has raised a number of problems with the notion of humans as evolutionarily unique. These discoveries have also raised issues regarding the concept of human uniqueness that has long played a central role within key interpretations of the hominin fossil record and has also provided the key lens through which many theologians have interpreted the meaning of humans as the “image and likeness of God” (imago Dei). I suggest that the best way to understand the imago Dei in light of human origins and hominin diversity is the early Jewish and early Christian concept of historical or biblical election.

Die Zeit im Bild

Abstract In this article, the question is discussed if at least some passages of the apocalyptic main part of Revelation, which is full of metaphorical imagery, conveys content that referred to contemporary history. The analysis of chosen passages of early Jewish and early Christian apocalyptic literature shows that it is principally conceivable that apocalyptic texts informed by metaphorical imagery can make reference to facts of contemporary history. The interpretation of Rev 13:18 and 17:9a lead to the conclusion that the text Rev 13–17 as a whole, but also the texts Rev 11:1–14 and Rev 17:7–9a, 9b–14 directly reflect persons, events and circumstances of the time of the composition of Revelation.

Book review: Other Worlds and Their Relation to This World: Early Jewish and Ancient Christian Traditions, written by Tobias Nicklas, Joseph Verheyden, Erik M. M. Eynikel, and Florentino García Martínez

Book review: Other Worlds and Their Relation to This World: Early Jewish and Ancient Christian Traditions, written by Tobias Nicklas, Joseph Verheyden, Erik M. M. Eynikel, and Florentino García Martínez

A Multiplicity of Washing Rites and a Multiplicity of Experiences

If experience can be defined as the affectively charged interaction with the world by means of the body as agency or medium, various sites of such affectively charged interaction mapped on to the body may be fruitfully analysed to explain the operations of religion as discourse. Baptism is one such site. In fact, baptism as the shorthand for of collective noun denoting a spectrum of ritual practices is a particularly apposite example. Baptism as ritual practice has had a varied history, both in terms of originary context as well as interpretive or discursive trajectories. This essay primarily tracks two such significant trajectories: the one being baptismal practices as purification rites operating in socially ‘heterodox’ early Jewish and early Christian groups within an apocalyptic, dissociative framework; the other being ‘orthodox’ baptismal discourse as expressed in, for instance, Cyril of Jerusalem’s Mystagogical Catheceses. In the former, the strong affect of dissociation is coupled with visionary experiences, hence its embeddedness in apocalyptic trajectories with their strongly dismissive stance to the surrounding world. In the case of the latter, the dramatic performances of the Easter liturgy, arguably, created the experience of salvation and resurrection. In both instances, the intersection of ritual, bodily experience, religious discourse, and social imaginaire provides the explanatory framework for baptism as foundational ritual practice in the making and maintenance of religious discourse and its attendant experiential effects. In this sense, such is the argument pursued in the essay, baptism is a core facet of early Jewish and early Christian religious experience.

Ignatius of Antioch and the Parting of the Ways: Early Jewish–Christian Relations. By Thomas A. Robinson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2009. xiv + 285 pp. $27.95 paper.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Rethinking Early Jewish—Christian Relations: Matthean Community History as Pharisaic Intragroup Conflict

(ProQuest: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.) Anyone interested in the religio-ethnic identity and social location of the community/communities that produced the Gospel of Matthew must contend not only with multilayered composition but also with the complex reception history of this text.1 While the Gospel was used by groups identifying themselves as Jewish, it also served the needs of people with a non-Jewish identity who actively opposed a understanding of religion.2 Interestingly, these two seemingly irreconcilable uses of the Gospel of Matthew are reflected in modern theories regarding the identity of the community behind the text: some scholars argue that Mattheans were well within the boundaries of (intra muros),3 that the author was a non-Jew writing for a community that had parted ways with the (extra muros).4 Within and between these two positions, there are numerous interpretations varying in both methodological approaches and conclusions.5 The purpose of the present study is to outline a social-scientific approach to the question of the nature and status of the group(s) that transmitted, redacted, and wrote down the traditions included in the Gospel. I shall begin by noting some problematic terms and categories that, in my opinion, confuse the discussion and may lead to inaccurate conclusions. After having identified the type of religion evidenced by the text and having related that religious type to the question of ethnic identity, I shall examine tensions between the Mattheans and society generally, on the one hand, and between Mattheans and Pharisees more specifically, on the other. In order to proceed, it will be necessary to reconstruct and analyze first-century institutions of importance to the Mattheans from a social-scientific perspective: we need a body to locate a soul.6 I will argue that, while Mattheans were initially part of the Pharisaic association, the community that authored the Gospel was in the process of leaving the larger collectivity after the war of 66-70 C.E. Tensions between the Mattheans and society generally seem to have been comparatively low, both before and after 70; relations between the Mattheans and other Pharisees, however, were more complex and negative, with tensions increasing drastically after 70 C.E. The final sections will provide detailed as well as more general arguments supporting this reconstruction of the Matthean community and its history. Essential to the present interpretation of the social location of the Mattheans is Ed Sanders's well-argued case for a common Judaism in first-century society, as well as his and others' insistence on the limited influence of the Pharisees in that society.7 I. THE RELIGIO-ETHNIC IDENTITY OF THE MATTHEAN COMMUNITY Theories regarding the religio-ethnic identity of the Mattheans are many and varied, from scholars who see their community as excluding non-Jews to those who argue for an exclusively non-Jewish community-and several positions in between.8 Since it is human to think in categories and concepts, and these tend to create boxes limiting our horizons, it is necessary to address the question of terminology in order to take the discussion further.9 Most often, Matthean scholars speak of Matthean identity in terms of binary opposites, whereby Jesus and the disciples/the Mattheans/Christianity/the church are at one end of the spectrum, and Jews/Israel/Judaism/the synagogue at the other.10 A close reading of the Gospel, however, suggests that such distinctions are not found in the text, but rather imposed on it from other ancient or modern sources. Once such false opposites are removed and authentic opposites mapped, many of the traditional conclusions about the relationship between Mattheans and others in the Gospel are proved problematic. Furthermore, the very terms Jewish Christianity and/or Jewish Christians must also be mentioned as problematic, since they tend to obscure what they intend to denote, namely, a belief in Jesus as the Messiah embodied in communities existing within the religious system of Judaism. …

The Great Opponent. The Devil in Early Jewish and Formative Christian Literature

The Great Opponent. The Devil in Early Jewish and Formative Christian Literature

The Apostolic Fathers: The Didache

The Didache is perhaps the earliest test in the collection of writings known as the Apostolic Fathers. It purports to be a collection of instructions given by Jesus, through the twelve apostles, to provide catechesis for new Gentile converts prior to|baptism. The text is particularly important in providing insight into the life of an early Jewish Christian community, including its baptismal and Eucharistic liturgy, as well as offering evidence for the evolution of leadership structures in at least one early Christian community.

"Are Any among You Sick?" The Health Care System in the Letter of James

(Proquest Information and Learning: Foreign Text Omitted) Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective. (Jas 5:14-16 NRSV) This passage from the Letter of James provides readers with a precious glimpse into the understanding of illness and healing in an early Jewish Christian community.1 The author instructs anyone who is sick (...) in the community to call the elders, who will pray and anoint the individual with oil. The passage goes on to speak of the efficacy of prayer for healing and to develop links between sin and sickness, healing and confession of sin (w. 1516). At first glance straightforward, these verses in fact raise a complex of questions for the modern interpreter. Who are the elders who are called to heal, and why does James assume that they have a special healing ability or authority? If the elders are singled out as healers, why does James impute a healing role also to the community as a whole (5:16)? Why is the sick person to be anointed, when prayer alone would seem to be effective for healing (5:15a)? Why does James presuppose connections between illness and sin (qualified in 5:15b) and between confessing of sin and healing (5:16)? In general, what does this passage reveal about James's view of the etiology of sickness: Is it sent from God as punishment or correction? Does it derive from the devil? Does it originate from natural causes? Finally, does this passage provide information about actual, everyday treatment of illness in James's community? These and related questions regarding healing and illness in the community addressed by James cannot be answered in isolation. They are interrelated, and the task of the interpreter is to uncover their connections. To this end, my article adopts a holistic approach developed in medical anthropology: the analysis of a particular culture's understanding and treatment of illness as a care system.2 Recently, Hector Avalos and John J. Pilch have applied this systematic approach to the NT (particularly to Gospel studies); my purpose is to extend this method to the Letter of James.3 My article begins with a brief overview of medical anthropology's concept of health care I then describe some basic elements of the care system in James's community: the symbolic world of James and the understanding of illness and healing within that world, the system's etiology of illness, its therapeutic strategies, the identity of its healers, and its control of access to care. As the article proceeds, I reflect on the interrelationships of these elements within the system. Two notes of clarification are necessary before beginning. First, in applying this approach to James, I do not presuppose a detailed knowledge about the community to which James is written, nor about its author. Scholarship has come to no firm conclusions regarding either authorship or audience.4 The ambiguity about the audience should not be surprising, however, given that scholars such as Richard Bauckham have shown persuasively that James is best understood as an encyclical letter written to a generalized audience.5 Such a letter, then, can supply only generic information about the community (e.g., that there are rich and poor in the community, that there are disputes among factions). I do assume, however, that the letter gives access to the basic beliefs of the community (i.e., the symbolic world shared by an author and his or her audience).6 In discussing the care system in James, then, I presuppose that the letter provides access to generalized social information and, more importantly, to the symbolic world of the community, a conceptual system that includes the community's understanding of illness and healing. …

Passover and Easter: origin and history to modern times

In these companion volumes of essays, Jewish and Christian scholars examine from historical, theological and aesthetic perspectives, the practices and intricate interrelationships of Passover and Easter. Several essays lament the antisemitism that has infected the liturgy and one - Israel Yuval's Easter and Passover as early Jewish Christian Dialogue- pushes beyond the oft-told tale of Jewish-Christian enmity, to explore ways in which the development of worship patterns of the two faiths have influenced one another.

Another Look at ean mh in Galatians 2:16

Bell & Howell Information and Learning: Foreign text omitted The NRSV translates first part of Gal 2:16: We know that a person is justified not by works of law but (eav /Ij) through faith Jesus Most translations and commentaries agree that Eav lij Gal 2:16a is adversative and that relationship between justification by observance of law and justification by faith Christ is antithetical.l J. D. G. Dunn sparked debate over Eav lIj Gal 2:16a when he suggested possibility of understanding these two words as introducing an exception: we know that a person is justified not by works of law except (Eav Tij) through faith Jesus Christ.2 In other words, law would justify as long as one also had faith Christ. The relationship between law and faith would be complementary. In a recent article William O. Walker, Jr., agrees with Dunn translating eav wn as exceptive and yet maintains an antithetical relationship between faith Christ and observance of law.3 The following chart summarizes possibilities: In short, two distinct issues have emerged-translation and understanding. 'Eav its may be translated as introducing an exception, or it may be translated adversatively. If one accepts adversative translation, then an antithetical understanding of relationship between faith Christ and observance of law justification necessarily results. If one accepts exceptive translation, one may still understand relationship between faith Christ and law observance an antithetical manner (with Walker) or a complementary manner (with Dunn). Hidden beneath these layers of scholarly debate is a rare glimpse into mind-set and presuppositions of early Jewish Christianity with regard to justification and Mosaic law. 1. A Plausible Translation Perhaps most compelling advantage of an adversative translation of Eav g/j is that Paul clearly expresses an antithetical relationship at end of v. 16 as well as elsewhere his writings? On other hand, apart from Gal 2:16a Paul never employs adversative eav g.j. Since eav w&j occurs only twelve times undisputed Pauline corpus, a brief overview will demonstrate that Paul always uses eav gI to express exception. In Rom 10:15 are they to proclaim him (eav wrj) they are sent (and then they will proclaim him). In Rom 11:23 Israel will be grafted back they remain unbelief (and that case they will not be grafted back in). The apostle denies 1 Cor 8:8 position that he and his audience are worse off they eat. In 1 Cor 9:16 woe unto Paul he proclaims gospel (and that case there would be no woe for Paul). He is a noisy gong or clanging cymbal when he speaks tongues he has love (1 Cor 13:1). Paul will not benefit Corinthians he speaks to them in some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching (1 Cor 14:6). How will anyone know what is being played there are distinct notes (1 Cor 14:7)? Likewise, how will anyone know what is being said Corinthians utter intelligible speech ( 1 Cor 14:9)? Paul asserts that a conversation will be meaningless participants know meaning of a sound (1 Cor 14:11). In 1 Cor 14:28 potential tongues speakers should remain silent an interpreter is present (and then they may speak). In 1 Cor 15:36 what one sows does not come to life it dies (and then it does come to life). That Paul never uses adversative Eav /rj elsewhere indicates that he is not likely doing so Gal 2:16a.5 Throughout rest of NT, Eav '-j is normally translated as exceptive. Nevertheless, a few instances are adversative, which would indicate contrast or antithesis. John 15:4a says: the branch cannot bear fruit by itself (Eav tv MnI) it abides vine. The protasis, unless it abides vine, is not an exception to branch being unable to bear fruit by itself. …

An Ancient Jewish Christian Source on the History of Christianity: Pseudo-Clementine Recognitionas 1.27-71

An Ancient Jewish Christian Source on the History of Christianity: Recognitions 1.27-71, by F. Stanley Jones. Texts and Translations 37; Christian Apocrypha Series 2. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995. Pp. xiv + 208. $39.95. The literature is a main source for our knowledge of several forms of early Jewish The Tubingen School saw it as a key piece of evidence for a split between Petrine and Pauline Christianity from earliest times. Its literary and historical relationships, both internally between its Recognitions and Homilies and externally with other witnesses to Jewish Christianity, have long been debated. While interest in this rather arcane but significant area of early Christian history has grown and receded over the last century and a half, recent scholarship has seen a modest increase of interest. Now we are fortunate to have in published form this contribution from a leading specialist in this literature. Jones's work is a revision of his 1989 Vanderbilt University Ph.D. dissertation directed by Gerd Ludemann, Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions 1.27-71: Early Jewish Christian Perspectives on the Nature and History of Christianity. For this volume, Jones has updated the bibliography and added an English translation of the Latin version of Recognitions, putting his translation of the Syriac and Latin versions, with occasional Armenian fragments in translation, in parallel columns for ready comparison. Other than these additions, the main lines and the detailed content are largely the same. Nonetheless, that this book is a revision of the author's dissertation is nowhere stated; that it has been substantially complete from 1989 is implied on p. 31. In chapter 1, Jones surveys scholarship on his topic for the last century and a half, especially with an eye to source-critical issues, contending that the source-critical conclusions of Georg Strecker have become dominant without adequate examination. Chapter 2 examines the problem of evaluating the two complete versions, Latin and Syriac, of the lost Greek original of Book 1 of the Recognitions, concluding that both are of the same value. Chapter 3 features side-by-side English translations of the Syriac, Latin, and fragmentary Armenian texts of R 1.27-71. In chapter 4, the heart of the book, a special source is identified in R 1.27.1-44.1, 53.4-71.6. Jones argues that although this source shares some key themes with the Ascents of James witnessed by Epiphanius, it is not to be identified with it, directly or indirectly. Chapter 5 concludes by identifying the author of this source as a Jewish Christian of about 200 CE, possibly a Jewish-Christian presbyter or bishop in Jerusalem. He appreciates astrology, views Jewish Christianity as the only true form of Judaism, and is concerned for the Christian inheritance of the land of Israel. The volume ends with a bibliography and indexes of passages, modern authors, and subjects, this last unusually detailed and helpful. In general, Jones's scholarship is careful and complete, and his writing style is clear. Chapter 1 raises well the issue of reexamining the current source-critical consensus. …

Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew and Early Jewish Christianity

The author attempts to pinpoint the date of the Shem-Tob type Matthaean text by locating its theology within the history of Jewish Christianity. After delineating four theological motifs in Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew: (1) Exaltation of John the Baptist, (2) Continued Relevance of the Baptism of John, (3) Delayed Inclusion of the Gentiles, (4) Delayed Recognition of Jesus as the Messiah, a comparison is made with the theologies of several Jewish Christian groups mentioned in the New Testament and later Christian literature. Although the distinctive motifs in the Hebrew Matthew are generally represented within Jewish Christianity, no single group is a good candidate for publishing this text. A general date within the first four centuries is, therefore, suggested for the Shem-Tob type text.

An Ancient Jewish-Christian Source on the History of Christianity: Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions 1. 27-71 (review)

Reviewed by: An Ancient Jewish-Christian Source on the History of Christianity: Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions Lawrence E. Frizzell F. Stanley Jones. An Ancient Jewish-Christian Source on the History of Christianity: Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions 1. 27–71. Texts and Translations’ Christian Apocrypha Series. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995. Pp. xiii + 208. $39.95. The Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions and Homilies bear witness to an early Christian novel describing Clement of Rome’s conversion to Christian faith, his travels with St. Peter and his discovery of lost members of his family. Do these texts, which share much material in common, depend on an earlier “Basic Writing?” How do they relate to other sources for the history of the early Church? F. Stanley Jones offers a thorough review of scholarship over the past century and a half, with critical remarks that evaluate the debate. Thus he lays the foundation for his own work. Versions survive in Syriac and in Latin (the work of Rufinus of Aquileia about 406), with fragments of the original Greek and in an Armenian translation. Jones renders an important service by translating the Syriac of Recognitions 1:27–71 for the first time and placing it in parallel with his rendering of the Latin, as well as the Armenian fragments. This covers 57 pages of careful work. But why were the original texts not included in a series of appendices? The presence of these materials would have allowed the historian or theologian to use this work more effectively. The second contribution of this book is a 44 page chapter on the “isolation of the source material.” Here Jones interacts with other scholars as he looks for signs of the redactor’s touch and then postulates that a “Basic Writing” can be extracted from the extant sources. He discusses quotations of the Pseudo-Clementine texts in the Chronicon Paschale, the Panarion of Epiphanius, and the Apostolic Constitutions. Again it would have been helpful to include the original of these passages. The relationship of the Clementine stories to the Book of Jubilees, the New Testament, and the passages of Hegesippus preserved by Eusebius is reviewed as well. Currently scholars agree that Hegesippus and Recognitions 1.27–72 depend on an earlier source or tradition rather than one drawing directly from the other. Jones would be happy however, to make this section of Recognitions derive from Hegesippus (142–45). How do the sources of Recognitions 1. 27–71 relate to “The Ascents of [End Page 288] James” mentioned by Epiphanius? Common themes are found elsewhere in early Jewish Christian sources and differences make contact unlikely. However, Jones finds links with the extant citations from the Gospel of the Ebionites and Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho (148–50). Jones posits an original structure for the Basic Writing (150–55) and, in a brief concluding chapter, he builds on his theory that the original narrator in the source is Matthew. Thus he presents traditions that might claim an antiquity equal to the Pauline letters. “This study has unearthed the thoughts and struggles of at least one of these Jewish Christians” (of the late second century) (168). The traditions include a development of the Jubilees story about Abraham as an astrologer, a concern for the Land of Israel, an understanding of Jesus’ death as a sacrifice and its effect on Temple worship, the destruction of the Temple and the wretched lot of Jews thereafter. Each of these topics receives only a sketchy treatment in this investigation. There is an extensive bibliography and fine indices (passages from ancient literature, modern authors and subjects). Lawrence E. Frizzell Seton Hall University South Orange, New Jersey Copyright © 1997 The Johns Hopkins University Press

The Palestinian Uprising: A War by Other Means (review)

Book Reviews 199 The final chapter explores Paul's relationship to the church in Jerusalem and the place ofJames (pp. 149-92). Hill suggests that while the Jerusalem church recognized Paul's ministry, it never accepted his understanding of the law. This led to Paul's break with Antioch and made his standing as an apostle ambiguous. Paul's opponents in Galatians, Philippians, and II Corinthians were not, however, Judaizers representing Jerusalem. James was a moderate who was forced to contend with both Paul and his opponents. The strengths of Hill's monograph lie in his careful reading of NT texts and thorough critique. Apart from a couple of bothersome gaps he has collected and analyzed all of the available biblical and secondary material. His reasoning is penetrating and forceful. The monograph successfully lays to rest the spectre of early Jewish Christianity in two neatly defined groups. It is of value to anyone seriously interested in Jc::wish Christianity, Paul, or Acts. On the other hand, the reader who hopes to find a convincing historical reconstruction 'of the earliest communities will be disappointed. One factor which limits the reconstructions Hill offers is the fact that he depends almost exclusively on the biblical text. Even when he cites other ancient evidence it is almost always through secondary sources. Hengel's work is clearly superior here. If Baur built too much on too little, Hill builds too little on too much. Gregory E. Sterling Department of Theology University of Notre Dame The Palestinian Uprising: A War by Other Means, by F. Robert Hunter. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. 312 pp. $24.95. This detailed study of the Intifada is a thoroughly researched and documented examination of a major milestone and set of events and, developments in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is a worthwhile and thoughtful (and thought provoking) study wl,ich is done in historical development from a background of the Palestinian uprising through the first half of 1990. Professor F. Robert Hunter ofTulane University was most fortunately positioned to launch into this study when the Int.ifada got underway just as he was starting a year as a Visiting Research Scholar at the Hebrew University ofJerusalem. Hunter's book includes a wide range of cited source materials and extensive interviews, a substantial majority of which are with Palestinians. 200 SHOFAR Winter 1993 Vol. 11, No.2 The footnotes tend to focus quite heavily on Palestinian Arab sources. Israeli Jews interviewed, while thoughtful, are preponderantly on the critical side of the internal discussion and debate in Israel vis-a-vis governmental policies and actions concerning the Intifada. For instance, Dr. Meron Benvenisti, Director of the West Bank Data Base Project and former Deputy Mayor ofJerusalem, is a highly respected authority on West Bank developments and their significance; in this reviewer's judgment he is a powerful and incisive critic of Israeli policy who deserves to be heeded, but in a variety of passages and sections of his book Hunter relies rather excessively on Benvenisti's thoughts and materials. Hunter's book is not a case for the prosecution against Israel and its handling of the Intifada, and he works at making a scholarly presentation and keeping a moderate tone. What emerges then is a sometimes blow-byblow account which in some respects can be more damaging to the Israeli governmental position and actions (land expropriations, documented cas~s of police and military brutality, a host of economic sanctions all too indiscriminately applied, etc.) than some high pitched or clearly partisan presentation. The author's accounts of Palestinian organizational activities and efforts through a network of committees, and such varied things as private gardens, the use of homes for conducting retail trade and other business during the uprising, show an impressive set of operations by the people of the West Bank and Gaza. At times Hunter seems to be overidealizing the Palestinians, and he sometimes seems to be swallowing everything he is told. He does, however, warn himself and his readers to resist the temptation to exaggerate the Intifada's accomplishments. He points out and illustrates the tensions between the "popular committees" and the local population, and between...

Not So Idle Thoughts about EIDOLOTHUTON

It is commonly assumed that εἰδωλόθυτον is a polemical term created by early Jews to refer to meat sacrificed to a pagan god. An exhaustive search of the data in the TLG and in the papyri casts doubts on this hypothesis. All of the references to εἰδωλόθυτον in the sources are found in Christian texts, with two exceptions; and both of these exceptions may have been influenced by Christian redaction. In any case, it appears that neither of these texts antedates the Corinthian correspondence. Thus, this term may have originated in early Jewish Christianity. A study of all the NT references to εἰδωλόθυτον reveals that this term in the early period was distinguishable from ἱερόθυτον (sacred food), and that it meant meat sacrificed to and eaten in the presence of an idol, or in the temple precincts. Numerous reference to εἰδωλόθυτον in the Greek Fathers show that Chrysostom and others understood this to be the meaning of the term in Acts 15 and in other contexts. Several possible implications of the above are: (1) the Decree in Acts 15 is about Gentiles refraining from meals and immorality in pagan temples, not about them keeping a modicum of Jewish, or Noachic food laws; (2) 1 Cor. 8-10 reflects Paul’s acceptance and implementation of the Decree; (3) Galatians was written before the Decree and reflects the struggle that led to the Decree; (4) Paul and James were in basic agreement in regard to what Gentiles needed to do to maintain table fellowship with Jewish Christians—avoid pagan feasts and immorality. Neither imposed circumcision or food laws on Gentiles. The latter was the position of the Judaising faction in the Jerusalem Church who were more conservative than James, Peter, or Paul. As C. Hill’s recent ‘Hellenists and Hebrews’ shows, F.C. Baur’s view of early Christianity is no longer adequate.

The Phenomenon of Early Jewish-Christianity: Reality or Scholarly Invention?

The Phenomenon of Early Jewish-Christianity: Reality or Scholarly Invention?