Geza Vermes Research Articles

NOTE: A newly discovered and identified bilingual Targum manuscript

In memory of Geza Vermes ל"ז This note announces and publishes for the first time a heretofore unknown and unidentified fragment of a medieval codex manuscript that presents consecutive verses of Gen. 15 and 16 in alternating Hebrew (Scripture) and Aramaic (Targum). It discusses the significance of this manuscript for our knowledge of the codicology of Targum as it relates to the tandem performance of biblical text and its translation.

Genres of Rewriting in Second Temple Judaism: Scribal Composition and Transmission by Molly M. Zahn

Reviewed by: Genres of Rewriting in Second Temple Judaism: Scribal Composition and Transmission by Molly M. Zahn Sara Milstein Molly M. Zahn. Genres of Rewriting in Second Temple Judaism: Scribal Composition and Transmission. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. 264 pp. Molly Zahn wants us to stop centering the Bible. More specifically, she wants us to stop centering the Bible when we talk about writing and textuality in the Second Temple period. She knows it's not an easy task, cognitively speaking, and so she doesn't fault us in principle for viewing Second Temple Jewish texts through a canonical, teleological lens. But she does implore us to confront the ways in which our categories (and also our subfields) have constrained our thinking and have prevented us from making important connections across different groups of texts. When we use phrases like "Rewritten Bible" (coined by Geza Vermes in 1961) or even its replacement, "Rewritten Scripture," for texts like Jubilees or the Temple Scroll, we imply that "rewriting" is associated exclusively with biblical texts and only yielded texts that are noncanonical. Neither of these points is true. The act of rewriting older works was ubiquitous in the ancient Near East and was used both for texts that ended up in the Bible(s) and texts that did not. For Zahn, it's not just a matter of anachronism; it's about finding categories that better suit the evidence so that we can begin to reshape our thinking. [End Page 403] The overarching replacement term that Zahn proposes is deceptively simple: rewriting. Under this umbrella, she identifies two main categories: revision and reuse. Revision constitutes anything that represents a new copy of a text: under this category, we can thus put MT Jeremiah, the Greek versions of Esther, and Serekh Ha-Yaḥad (a sectarian text that is likewise attested in substantially different versions). Reuse, then, constitutes anything that represents a new work: texts such as Chronicles, Jubilees, or Genesis Apocryphon.1 Zahn thus makes no distinction here between "biblical" and "nonbiblical" texts: both categories can include texts that are now associated with the Bible (or better, Bibles) to varying degrees and texts that are not. Not only does this new framing highlight the limitations of categories such as "biblical," "Rewritten Bible/Scripture," and "extrabiblical," but it also calls into question the ongoing association of rewriting with authority. Though Zahn does not say it directly, it seems fair to say that "authoritative" has operated in the field as a kind of cipher for "protobiblical" or "scriptural," in that scholars tend to assume that texts that ended up in the Bible must have been viewed as authoritative at Qumran, given the number of revisions and literary offshoots that they generated. Zahn does not sever the ties between authority and protobiblical scrolls entirely, but she helpfully shifts the conversation away from the Bible, forcing us to acknowledge again that rewriting at Qumran (and beyond) was not limited to protobiblical texts. In this context, her discussions of revision in texts like the War Scroll, Serekh Ha-Yaḥad, and Hodayot help to decenter biblical texts as the primary sites of scribal activity. One of the most impressive aspects of this book is its scope. Here we have the work of a scholar in her prime, not afraid to venture into uncharted territory and to go beyond her comfort zone of Qumran. Zahn brings genre theory and translation theory into conversation with Second Temple texts; in addition to discussions of Qumran literature, she deftly handles rewriting within the Bible "itself," the Septuagint, and the Aramaic targumim, and she even throws in a dash of midrash and Mesopotamian literature for good measure. As such, she models what she argues for elsewhere: engaging in conversations across texts and subfields so that we can learn from one another. One of her most insightful chapters, to my mind, is on translation as rewriting; here, she covers cases of rewriting in the Septuagint, the targumim, and Genesis Apocryphon, demonstrating well what might be gained not only in viewing translation as rewriting but also in studying such diverse texts in tandem. Needless to say, her footnotes are to be mined both for their...

Bogdan Gabriel Bucur. Scripture Re-envisioned: Christophanic Exegesis and the Making of a Christian Bible. BAC 13.

Bogdan Gabriel Bucur. <i>Scripture Re-envisioned: Christophanic Exegesis and the Making of a Christian Bible.</i> BAC 13.

Satan and Circumcision: The Devil as the ἄγγελος πονηρός in Barn 9:4

Abstract This study argues that the ἄγγελος πονηρός in Barn 9.4 was Satan. James Carleton Paget, Adolf Hilgenfeld, Ferdinand Prostmeier and Geza Vermes gestured toward this interpretation, but none offered evidence for this identification other than assertion. In Barnabas, there is a constellation of ideas that connect circumcision with Satan, namely circumcision with pagan idolatry (9.6), idolatry to demons (16.7), and finally idolatry and demons to Satan’s ultimate rule (18.1; 20.1). Satan is also related to other obsolete Jewish cultic practices (2.4, 6; 16.1–2, 7). Barnabas also repeatedly describes the devil with the adjective πονηρός. Additionally, the fourth-century papyrus PSI VII 757r reads ἄγγελος ὁ πονηρός, identifying the angel as Satan. The “Ethiopianisation” of Satan as “the black one” (as argued by Clare Rothschild) confirms this reading. Since “Ethiopians” practiced circumcision, the devil as a “the black one” associates Satan with circumcision.

The Community Rule: A Critical Edition with Translation by Sarianna Metso

Reviewed by: The Community Rule: A Critical Edition with Translation by Sarianna Metso James M. Tucker sarianna metso, The Community Rule: A Critical Edition with Translation (EJL 51; Atlanta: SBL Press, 2019). Pp. x + 60. $49. In this volume, Sarianna Metso provides a new critical edition of the Qumran Community Rule manuscripts. Under the rubric of the Community Rule, the author includes fourteen manuscripts: 1QS, 1Q29a, 4QpapSa, 4QSb, 4QpapSc, 4QSd, 4QSe, 4QSf, 4QSg, 4QSh, 4QSi, 4QSj, 5QS, and 11QFragment related to Serekh ha-Yaḥad. In addition to new transcriptions of these manuscripts and fragmentary remains, M. provides a textual apparatus, textual notes, and an English translation. The presentation of the manuscripts takes as its starting point the editorial methods of the Hebrew Bible Critical Edition series (HBCE). The volume contains an introduction, bibliography, and Hebrew text with English translation. In the introduction, M. introduces her editorial method and offers a brief history of the discovery and a physical description of the Community Rule manuscripts; theoretical and methodological considerations; and the layout of the volume. As part of a rationale for a new edition, M. draws from the editorial method of the Hebrew Bible Critical Edition series (general editor Ronald Hendel, 2016). She clearly articulates her objective, namely, “to present an archetype” of the Community Rule. An “archetype” is “the latest attainable version of the text behind the existing manuscripts witnesses” (p. 1). The application of the word “critical” modifies the textual presentation, insofar as the Hebrew text is not extant in any single Community Rule manuscript. The reader, however, should be aware that there are equally valid editorial methods apart from the HBCE editorial principles. There have been significant developments, for example, in the fields of digital humanities, scholarly digital editions, and material philology that present significant challenges to the binaries made between a diplomatic text and critical text presentation. Tara L. Andrews, in her essay, “The Third Way: Philology and Critical Edition in the Digital Era” (Journal of the European Society for Textual Scholarship 10 [2013] 61–76) highlights how a digital medium circumvents the type of editorial decisions of the traditional methods of an archetype theory (e.g., HBCE) or diplomatic theory (BHS, Biblia Hebraica Quinta, or the Hebrew University Bible Project). In other words, many of the editorial decisions discussed by M. are reflective of the medium of a print edition—along with its limitations. According to the author, the apparatus helps the reader to see the development of the [End Page 128] text, since scribes creatively contributed to the development of the tradition. For M., the manuscript of “1QS alone makes it clear that its text is an amalgamation of disparate passages most likely originating from a variety of sources” (p. 2). The Cave 4, 5, and 11 fragmentary manuscripts further attest to a heterogeneous character of the tradition. In addition to manuscript variants, the apparatus contains brief notes on paleographical issues and/or differences of transcriptions in contrast to the author’s previous work; Elisha Qimron’s editions (The Scrolls of the Judaean Desert [Hebrew] [Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, 2010]), and Phillip Alexander and Geza Vermes’s edition of the Cave 4 and 5 manuscripts in Qumran Cave 4.XIX: Serekh Ha-Yaḥad and Two Related Texts (DJD 26; Oxford: Clarendon, 1998). Under the heading of “Theoretical and Methodological Considerations,” M. alerts the reader to some lingering issues pertaining to how previous editors classified some of the Cave 1, 4, and 5 manuscripts (pp. 6–7). The issues revolve around the fragmentary nature of the manuscripts, appropriation of scholarly categories, and matters of presenting the Hebrew text of the Community Rule. Since some of the Cave 4 and 5 manuscripts present “variant editions” (p. 7), M. decided to present the Hebrew text and translation in a column format (see, e.g., pp. 26–37, 42–53). The two-column format presents 1QS adjacent to 4QSb and 4QSd, albeit with a single apparatus for both columns. In addition to an apparatus, M. provides a summary of the extant manuscripts just above the apparatus. The summary provides a list of the extant...

Genesis Apocryphon and Related Documents

Genesis Apocryphon and Related Documents

The Son of Man Problem: Critical Readings

This book is a welcome addition to T&amp;T Clark’s series Critical Readings in Biblical Studies. Reynolds should be commended for his work in selecting, editing, and bringing together previously published essays in order to illuminate the “Son of Man Problem” and the ensuing “Son of Man Debate” (p. xiii). The volume contains an opening introductory essay followed by four sections addressing the different issues involved in the problem. Each section has the same structure: a short introductory essay about the issue of the section, a number of articles addressing the issue, and an annotated bibliography. In the short introductory essay, Reynolds summarizes each article and indicates its significance to the topic. The annotated bibliography lists a few other significant articles and monographs (between 7 and 11) that could be pursued for further study of the topic that did not make it into the essays contained in the section.Reynolds starts the work with a longer opening essay that introduces the volume as a whole. It discusses the significance of the issue at hand, describes the debate about the term Son of Man, sketches out a brief history of scholarship, and then outlines three “methodological challenges” in the debate (diachronic or synchronic approaches, titular or non-titular use of “the Son of Man,” and the issues around the authenticity of Jesus’s saying). All of this is done for the reader in order to place the ensuing articles in the broader scholarly context. It is an excellent essay in its own right that clearly and critically summarizes the situation.The first section then considers issues of debate and method. The eight essays address the possibility of an answer to the debate and the various means by which any such answer can be ascertained. They are written by luminaries such as A. J. B. Higgins, C. D. F. Moule, M. D. Hooker, Carsten Colpe, Maurice Casey, F. H. Borsch, I. Howard Marshall, and Larry H. Hurtado.The second section covers the solutions to the problem that are reached on idiomatic grounds. There are seven essays in this section: two by Geza Vermes and one each by J. A. Fitzmyer, Richard Bauckham, Maurice Casey, Paul Owen and David Shepherd, and P. J. Williams.The third section presents eight essays grouped under the heading “Danielic Origins of ‘the Son of Man.’” As the title indicates, these essays by T. W. Manson, Norman Perrin, Ragnar Leivestad, Barnabas Lindars, W. Horbury, Adela Yarbro Collins, John J. Collins, and Lester L. Grabbe all examine the links between the “Son of Man” and Daniel.The final section contains four essays on the important topic “one like a son of man” in the Greek versions of Dan 7. The essays are by Johan Lust, Loren T. Stuckenbruck, Otfried Hofius and Reynolds himself.The volume concludes with a select bibliography (that goes well beyond the essays contained in the volume and the annotated bibliographies), and indexes of references, authors, and subjects.There are multiple strengths to this volume that make it an attractive starting point for any research on the “Son of Man.” Not only does it bring together the key articles in the debate in one place for ease of reference, but they are grouped in a way that enables students to get a handle on the issues and the methods used to answer the question quickly. The annotated bibliography at the end of each section removes the possible objection of selection bias because it lists articles and monographs that are significant but that were not included in the volume. The annotation enables a reader to consider which of these works they need to consult further. As such, it stimulates research even with materials not reproduced in full in the volume. Consequently, this book will not just enable readers to understand the debate but also position them well to undertake new research.While not all will agree with Reynolds’s selection of important essays or possible shaping of the debate by the headings used to group the articles, my greatest fear for the volume is its possible self-defeating nature. If it achieves its goals of helping readers enter the debate so that new solutions are proposed, then the volume will be dated because it does not contain the results of its own labor. Should this be the case, and I hope it will, then it will call for a second edition.Overall, this is an excellent volume that provides many of the key essays on a much debated and important topic in an easily accessible way. Students and scholars undertaking research on the “Son of Man” will thank Reynolds for his work on their behalf.

The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research by Hilde Brekke Møller

Reviewed by: The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Researchby Hilde Brekke Møller Llewellyn Howes Møller, Hilde Brekke 1. 2017. The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research. The Library of New Testament Studies576. London and New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark. Hardback. ISBN 978-0567675743. Pp. xiii + 241. £90. Geza Vermes is often mentioned as one of the scholars who contributed to the emergence of the so-called third quest for the historical Jesus by emphasising the Jewishness of Jesus. In this book, Møller evaluates the significance of Vermes in the context of Jesus research. But the monograph is not just about Vermes; it is more broadly about the third quest itself and how the quest has been presented in accounts of Jesus research. In other words, the work and contribution of Vermes function in the book as entry points to discuss more generally the third quest and historiography about it. "By discussing the significance of Geza Vermes's contribution to Jesus research, this study challenges the ways that research history has been written and contributes to our knowledge and understanding of Jesus research from the last decades" (4). Appropriately, the book pays particular attention to Vermes's first book on the historical Jesus, namely Jesus the Jew, although his other publications also receive consideration. The book is presented in four parts. Part one (chs. 1–3) is introductory, discussing the study itself, Geza Vermes and the history of Jesus research. Part two (chs. 4–8) focuses on the Jewishness of Jesus in historical Jesus studies and the role of Vermes in this regard. Part three (chs. 9–11) looks at Vermes's presentation of Jesus as a hasidand the impact of this theory on Jesus research more generally. According to Vermes, hasidimlike Honi the Circle-Drawer and Hanina ben Dosa were charismatic figures in ancient Judaism, known from rabbinic literature for performing miracles and having a close personal relationship with God. Part four (chs. 12–13) concludes the study. Chapter two includes a very brief biography of Geza Vermes and a summary of his publications on the historical Jesus. Chapter three focuses on historiography, discussing the strengths and weaknesses of presenting the quest in terms of distinct phases, commonly known as "the first/old quest (1774–1906), new/second quest (1953–1980), and third quest (1980–), paused by a 'moratorium' or 'no-quest period' in the first part of the [End Page 193]twentieth century (1906–1953)" (31). Drawing heavily on the work of Fernando Bermejo Rubio, Møller finds that "there is little reason for Jesus scholars to continue using the three-quest scheme" (36). Although Møller refers explicitly to these epochs in her study, including especially the "third quest," she does so in order to call the "three-quest scheme" into question, thereby contributing to other objections to understanding Jesus research in this way. When it comes to the third quest in particular, Møller challenges the "three-quest scheme" by paying particular attention to the Jewishness of Jesus and the purported shift in emphasis from theological to historical concerns. Chapter four focuses on Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels(London: Collins, 1973), Vermes's first and most important book in the context of Jesus research. For the most part, Vermes seems more concerned with the Synoptic Jesus than the historical Jesus. Remarks about the authenticity of particular NT texts are sparse and incidental. Yet Vermes is indeed interested in the historical Jesus. In Vermes's own words ( Jesus the Jew, 42), the Synoptic Gospels provide "a skeletal outline of Jesus of Nazareth as he really was" (47). The Jewishness of Jesus seems to be Vermes's most important criterion of authenticity, effectively supplanting the criterion of double dissimilarity. Knowledge of first-century Judaism is absolutely crucial to Vermes when it comes to interpreting the Gospels and determining authenticity. What is more, such knowledge adds information about the historical Jesus to what is available from the Gospels alone. In the words of Vermes ( Jesus the Jew, 42), aspects of first-century Judaism "add a little flesh to these...

Jewish Scholarship on the Resurrection of Jesus by David Mishkin

Reviewed by: Jewish Scholarship on the Resurrection of Jesus by David Mishkin Glenn B. Siniscalchi david mishkin, Jewish Scholarship on the Resurrection of Jesus (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2017). Pp. xiv + 256. $33. One of the common objections to the reliability of the Gospels is that they were written by committed believers whose bias prevented them from telling us the truth about Jesus. Apparently, the weight of this objection is only compounded by the fact that most scholars of the historical Jesus are influenced by ecclesiastical presuppositions. This challenge is one of the main reasons why David Mishkin's newest book will illuminate current discussions on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus: "It is certainly legitimate to raise the issue of objectivity among such scholars. Jewish scholars do not have a specific view of the resurrection of Jesus. It has been at best a secondary issue, hidden behind more pressing topics in the historic Jewish–Christian interaction" (p. 35; cf. 202). A major part of the book covers the history of Jewish responses to the resurrection (pp. 1-34, 118-57). Although most Jewish theologians have not offered much commentary, Mishkin notes that a shift is taking place, especially in the last several decades: "As Jewish interest in Jesus has continued, so has the documentation of this field of study. . . . The progress has been steady, based on the climate of both Jewish–Christian relations and the latest New Testament scholarship" (pp. 32, 34). Some Jews stay away from the resurrection because it was not of interest to them personally. Still others have not found it relevant to Judaism as a whole. More recently, there has been a slight interest in addressing the question of what happened to Jesus after the crucifixion. Concentrating on the resurrection of Jesus as a historical phenomenon, M. argues with consistency that Easter faith is not a matter of exploring the contents of faith alone. In the aftermath of the crucifixion (which was seen as a curse from God), something must have triggered the disciples' belief that God raised Jesus from the dead. He pointedly asks, "Why a resurrection (of one individual messiah) when there were other options regarding the afterlife which would have fit much more naturally?" (p. 172). This leads M. to highlight the biblical scholarship of Pinchas Lapide (The Resurrection of Jesus: A Jewish Perspective [Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2002]), Alan Segal (Life after Death: A History of the Afterlife in Western Religion [New York: Doubleday, 2004]), and Geza Vermes (The Resurrection: History and Myth [New York: Doubleday, 2008]). While Lapide believed that the evidence pointed conclusively in favor of Jesus's resurrection, Segal and Vermes remained skeptical. [End Page 742] Other Jewish scholars have argued that the resurrection is indefensible because the Gospels are untrustworthy. When they turn to Paul's conversion experience, they often explain it away in terms of psychological categories. Nonetheless, M. observes that all of these Jewish NT studies are a promising sign for further developments. By the end of the book, one may conclude that almost all major contemporary Jewish scholars writing on the subject affirm the existence and Jewishness of Jesus, the crucifixion, the postmortem appearance to Paul (which resulted in his conversion to Christ), the origin of disciples' belief in the resurrection of Jesus despite having predispositions to the contrary, and the rapid dissemination of the Christian movement. Despite Christian scholarship on the credibility of the resurrection (which may appear biased and unreliable), "the main historical events that make up this discussion are virtually the same for both groups [i.e., Jewish and Christian historians]: crucifixion, burial, disciples' belief, empty tomb, and Paul's dramatic turnaround" (p. 210). After reading M.'s book, one is further convinced that the question concerning the historicity of the resurrection is not about establishing the NT evidence as much as it is about explaining that evidence in a convincing way. In an area of biblical scholarship in which it is often difficult to find new avenues of research, M. is to be commended for taking advantage of the opportunity to write a book on Jewish perspectives on the resurrection. This book will undoubtedly be of great use to specialists...

The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research by Hilde Brekke Moller

The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research by Hilde Brekke Moller

Book Review: Geza Vermes and The Historical Jesus: Hilde Brekke Moller, The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research

Book Review: Geza Vermes and The Historical Jesus: Hilde Brekke Moller, <i>The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research</i>

The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research

The Vermes Quest: The Significance of Geza Vermes for Jesus Research

Kritische Geschichte der Jesusforschung: Von Kelsos und Origenes bis heute by Marius Reiser

Reviewed by: Kritische Geschichte der Jesusforschung: Von Kelsos und Origenes bis heute by Marius Reiser Linda M. Maloney marius reiser, Kritische Geschichte der Jesusforschung: Von Kelsos und Origenes bis heute ( SBS 235; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2015). Pp. 204. Paper €28. [Full disclosure: this reviewer and Marius Reiser have been friends and conversation partners since our student days in Tübingen in the 1980s.] In this volume for the Stuttgarter Bibelstudien series, Marius Reiser has reviewed in a scant two hundred pages the history of Jesus research, beginning with Origen's Contra Celsum and ending with our own contemporaries. R. is an acute and widely read scholar in Greek history and literature, and he brings that background, as well as his expertise in NT, to the task. He finds that Origen was in many ways a more accurate assessor of the evidence regarding Jesus than most, if not all, subsequent critics. Among the ancients he also includes a section on Porphyry. In the first chapter, "Kritische Geschichte der Jesusforschung," R. reviews a panoply of scholars whom, in his Vorwort, he divides essentially into skeptics and "orthodox." He numbers himself among the latter and describes these scholars as those who seek to think in accord with the ancient creeds that constitute the universal Christian confession: the conviction, that is, that historical-critical biblical research is done in a context of and is part of theology. The scholars whose work is treated in the first section include (among the non-orthodox) Reimarus, Johann Gottfried Herder, Matthias Claudius, David Friedrich Strauss, and Ernest Renan. A subsection on Marie-Joseph Lagrange locates him within his time period as an "orthodox" outlier. Then comes a chapter called "Der kreisende Berg" (with sardonic reference to the mountain that labored and brought forth a mouse). R. concentrates on the issue of identifying the historical Jesus with the biblical Christ, which he sees as the fundamental question asked (and for the most part answered in the negative) by the several "Quests." The most influential figure here is, of course, Rudolf Bultmann, and he receives the most extended critique. Ernst Käsemann, Günther Bornkamm, John Dominic Crossan, and the Jesus Seminar are sharply criticized; Gerd Theissen fares somewhat better. R. disputes Geza Vermes's thesis that Jesus was a Galilean ḥāsîd, with reference to R.'s own [End Page 346] previous book, Der unbequeme Jesus (Biblisch-theologische Studien 122; NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener Verlagsgesellschaft, 2012), in which he sought to show that Jesus was and remains an irritant in his own and subsequent religious communities. Even John Meier comes in for criticism here: though R. deeply respects his profound and diligent scholarship, R.'s response to the attempt to discover a Jesus-image acceptable to agnostics as well as believers is essentially: cui bono? The chapter on the conservative-critical line of thought starts with Martin Dibelius and includes the Jewish scholar Hans-Joachim Schoeps; R. agrees with Schoeps and Joseph Klausner, that Jesus "opened a path that necessarily led away from Judaism" (p. 115, citing Schoeps's 1963 essay, "Jesus und das jüdische Gesetz," in idem, Studien zur unbekannten Religions- und Geistesgeschichte [Göttingen: Musterschmidt, 1963]). Others treated here are C. H. Dodd, Milan Machovec, Ben F. Meyer, and N. T. Wright. R. finds his own point of view especially close to that of Meyer, whose attention to the work of Bernard Lonergan R. respects, and whose scholarship probably comes closest to that of R.'s and my own teacher, Gerhard Lohfink. He also values the late scholars Graham Stanton and Martin Hengel (who was teaching in Tübingen during our studies there). There follows a summary chapter on "the results of scholarship," and then a concluding section on fundamental principles and methods: those in use in the past and those still worth employing for the future. I have my disagreements with R. here and there. It seems to me that his summary dismissal of a "hermeneutic of suspicion" is too blunt an instrument. He means by it a principled skepticism of the veracity of the biblical witness (in essence, regarding the biblical writers as guilty until proven innocent), which is not what it means, for example, to...

The True Herod , written by Geza Vermes

The True Herod , written by Geza Vermes

Book Review: An Illustrated Life of Herod: Geza Vermes, The True Herod

Book Review: An Illustrated Life of Herod: Geza Vermes, <i>The True Herod</i>

Book review: The Story of the Scrolls: The Miraculous Discovery and True Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, written by Geza Vermes

Book review: The Story of the Scrolls: The Miraculous Discovery and True Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, written by Geza Vermes

Reading and Re-Reading Scripture at Qumran. 2 volumes: Genesis and Its Interpretation; Law, Pesher and the History of Interpretation. By MOSHE J. BERNSTEIN.

This rich collection by one of the foremost scholars of biblical interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls contains thirty previously published essays, prefaced by Introductions to each volume that outline the essays they preface but also include further reflection on Bernstein's ongoing scholarly journey. The first and last essays present wide-ranging treatments on Pentateuchal and biblical interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls originally presented at two congresses in Jerusalem marking the 50th and 60th anniversary of the discoveries. In parallel with Second Temple interpreters, Bernstein devotes the bulk of his attention, and Vol. 1, to the Book of Genesis. The second essay is a plea to employ the label ‘rewritten Bible’, coined by the late Geza Vermes, in a more narrowly defined manner than is often the case and in particular to differentiate between the supposed exegetical processes it implies and the notion of a genre of literature referred to by the terminology. Bernstein offers an impassioned defence of the second element in ‘rewritten Bible’ in the Introduction to Vol. 1 (pp. 2–4; see also Vol. 2, pp. 700–1). For him the issue hinges on the existence of ‘something that we can call “Bible”’ (p. 700) in the Second Temple period. The debate seems to me to centre on the question—alongside what else this literature was then cherished and how? Granted Bernstein's suggestion that a Ben Sira and a Josephus would have known what is meant by terms such ‘holy books’, for instance (p. 3), each of them, and the imaginary contemporary scholar conversing with them, may well have included much that was the same but also included distinctive elements. The study on rewritten Bible is followed by an essay on Genesis interpretation at Qumran more broadly. The bulk of Vol. 1 is devoted to analyses of 4Q252 (Commentary on Genesis) in three essays and the Genesis Apocryphon in six essays. Bernstein devotes judicious discussions to questions such as scholarly nomenclature, unity, and genre relating to both works. His observations that the idea of genre ‘belongs largely to the students of ancient literature rather than to its authors’ and that ‘we classify for our scholarly benefit’ (p. 217) are characteristic of his scrupulous commitment to a fair presentation of the witness of the ancient authors. Bernstein's background as a Targum scholar and his intimate familiarity with the Qumran materials make his essay revisiting the relationship of the Genesis Apocryphon and the Aramaic Targumim ‘from both perspectives’ particularly authoritative. Vol. 1 concludes with a study of 4Q464 (Exposition on the Patriarchs) published by E. Eshel and M. E. Stone in DJD 19 and two rich thematic essays dealing with Noah and the flood and the motif of angels at the Aqedah. In the latter study Bernstein's learned discussion spans from Second Temple traditions via rabbinic midrash to mediaeval piyyutim, concluding that the motif of ‘jealous and accusing angels’ is most likely an exegetical tradition spanning pre-rabbinic and rabbinic literature.

Christian Beginnings: From Nazareth to Nicaea by Geza Vermes (review)

ANCIENTChristian Beginnings: From Nazareth to Nicaea. By Geza Vermes. (New Haven: Yale University Press. 2013. Pp. xvi, 288. $30.00. ISBN 978-0-300-19160-8.)Geza Vermes, who passed away in May 2013, focused most of his scholarly attention on the Dead Sea Scrolls and on the historical Jesus. Christian Beginnings: From Nazareth to Nicaea was his final book, and in it Vermes endeavors to build upon his work on the historical Jesus through an assessment of how Jesus went from Galilean holy man to the second person of the Trinity at Nicaea in 325. Vermes argues that this metamorphosis developed over two unequal phases. The first phase was the short Jewish phase that lasted from AD 30 to 100, with the Synoptic Gospels, the first twelve chapters of Acts, and the Didache being the texts that correspond to this phase. These texts demonstrate that early Jewish-Christian followers did not view him as divine, but understood Jesus simply to teach total surrender to God in expectation of the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God. Ss. Paul and John, however, definitively alter perceptions of Jesus. Paul, whose writings were addressed to Gentile rather than Jewish audiences, draws attention to Jesus himself rather than to his message, elevating Jesus to the triumphant Son of God who is the source of universal salvation. John's Jesus bears no resemblance to the charismatic holy man from Galilee, but is turned into a celestial savior through John's appropriation of terminology derived from Plato and Philo. One finds in both Paul and John a harbinger of things to come, for it is during the second phase (the Gentile phase from the early-second century to the Council of Nicaea in 325) that we find Jesus and his religion fundamentally transformed to become that which would have been unrecognizable by Jesus and his first followers. With referthe ence to an array of Christian texts from the second through the fourth centuries, Vermes traces the progressive elevation of the figure of Jesus by Gentile Christians, an elevation that corresponded to the influx of Graeco-Roman ideas and modes of thinking foreign to Judaism. Thus one finds Justin Martyr, for example, initiate and explicate a Christology deeply imbued with Greek philosophical thought, and later thinkers develop an understanding of the identity of Jesus Christ along these lines. Vermes notes in particular the contributions of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian, and Origen, the latter representing the summit of pre-Nicene Christian thought. …

Is &lt;i&gt;rewritten Bible/Scripture&lt;/i&gt; the solution to the Synoptic Problem?

New Testament scholars have for centuries posited different solutions to the Synoptic Problem. Recently a new solution was proposed. Mogens Müller applies Geza Vermes’s term rewritten Bible to the canonical gospels. Accepting Markan priority, he views Matthew as rewritten Mark, Luke as rewritten Matthew, and John as additional source. This article examines Müller’s hypothesis by first investigating the history of the controversial term rewritten Bible/Scripture and its recent application to the New Testament Gospels. Müller’s hypothesis is then compared to other solutions to the Synoptic Problem, such as the Augustine, Griesbach, and Farrer-Goulder Hypotheses. The Two Document Hypothesis is discussed and Müller’s 2nd century Luke theory is compared to Burton Mack’s almost similar stance and tested with the argument of synoptic intertextuality in view of the possible but improbable early second century date for Matthew. Lastly, the relationship between the synoptic Gospels is viewed in terms of literary intertextuality. Müller suggests proclamation as motivation for the Gospels’ deliberate intertextual character. This notion is combined with the concept of intertextuality to suggest a more suitable explanation for the relationship between die Gospels, namely intertextual kerugma. This broad concept includes any form of intertextuality in terms of text and context regarding the author and readers. It suitably replaces rewritten Bible, both in reference to genre and textual (exegetical) strategy.

In Memoriam Geza Vermes

In Memoriam Geza Vermes