Band 7, Heft 2

Matt 1:17 indicates that Jesus’ genealogy is formed by three series of fourteen generations; however, this total number of generations does not match the preceding list in Matt 1:2-16. Interpreters have proposed multiple ways to understand this inconsistency which have yet to be collected and evaluated. A double literature review displays the limitations of this seemingly insoluble biblical conundrum. This article presents the tension between verse 17 and verses 2-17 of Matthew’s gospel as a puzzling reading experience that can best be described, in line with Stanley Fish, as a self-consuming artifact: an experience of incongruity in which the text and the reader are transformed through a process of negation. This approach also highlights other potential reversals in Matthew 1, such as Davidic traditions, that can yield a renewed outlook on this gospel.

The translation of Matthew 28:1 is notoriously difficult (ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων τῇ ἐπιφωσκούσῃ εἰς μίαν σαββάτων). Following a survey of proposals that place the discovery of Jesus’ resurrection at dawn or during the night, and finding these solutions wanting, this article highlights overlooked evidence in this passage’s long reception history. Some of this evidence is intratextual, namely, passages which could favor a day-night schema (Matt 4:2; 12:40) or in which Matthew discusses commerce and travel at night (Matt 14:15; 25:1-13). The second, intertextual set of evidence is found in the works of Eusebius, Didymus of Alexandria, Jerome, and Theodoret. These patristic authors provide a forgotten proposal whereby the resurrection is connected with the “dawn” of Ps 21:1 LXX. Since Matthew’s Passion Narrative appeals to this psalm in so many other instances, this patristic insight helpfully reframes the debate on this crux around the text and its reception history ( intentio operis ) rather than the elusive category of authorial intent ( intentio auctoris ).

The fourth century of the Common Era was a period significant for witnessing the effective birth of Christian historiography and the (putatively) definitive separation of ‘Jew’ and ‘Christian’ as distinctive identities. A text emerged, known as Pseudo-Hegesippus or De Excidio Hierosolymitano ( On the Destruction of Jerusalem ). This text illustrates how Christian historiography and Christian anti-Jewish ideology at that time could engage with the traditions of classical antiquity. In particular, this article argues that Pseudo-Hegesippus deploys figures from the Hebrew Bible in the mode of classical exempla and that it does so within the largely classical conceptual framework of national decline. For Pseudo-Hegesippus, biblical figures presented as classical exempla serve to illustrate the historical decline of the Jews until their effective end in 70 CE (when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple). One passage, De Excidio 5.2.1, and its enlistment of five Hebrew heroes illustrates this point particularly well. The use of exemplarity and the theme of national decline employed there help us appreciate De Excidio as a distinctive contribution to early Christian historiography and anti-Jewish literature in late antiquity; this expands our ability to imagine the ways in which fourth-century Christian authors could conceive of and articulate Jewish history in classical terms.

This article examines the reception of Scripture in presidential inaugurations, considering both the Bible as a material object within the oath of office ceremony and the Bible as a source of rhetoric within the inaugural address. Data from select presidential archives are also included in this study, especially letters from citizens, which offer a useful glimpse into the public impact of scriptural rhetoric. The broad chronological parameters of the data, which encompass 58 inauguration ceremonies from George Washington to Donald Trump, permit analysis of the varied functions of Scripture within the inaugural ceremony alongside consideration of larger diachronic trends. Analysis of this data underscores the capacity of the Bible to operate as a useful and remarkably flexible political tool that infuses this important transition of power with an aura of sanctity and divine authority. Appropriation of this ancient text functions to sacralize modern political speech, to fan the flames of American patriotism, to reinforce and enhance executive power, to facilitate efforts to persuade the public on a wide range of political agendas, and to furnish a language that justifies a variety of domestic and global policies. The inaugural Bible thus demonstrates the extent to which Scripture remains inextricably woven into the tapestry of American political discourse.