Volume 13, Issue 1

ABSTRACT This article presents the life and work of the Berlin coptologist Carl Schmidt (1868-1938) in the light of new sources, among them the correspondence between Schmidt and his mentor Adolf Harnack. Due to Carl Schmidt's continuous purchase of newly discovered texts and their preparation for critical editions changed the image of Ancient Christianity, partly in a radical sense. This is especially the case for the Manichaean and other Gnostic texts, but even for some apocrypha he discovered during his numerous expeditions to Egypt. The efforts of preparing critical editions of these newly found documents last until today. Thus first as an assistant of the “Berliner Kirchenväteredition”, then as an initially adjunct professor of Church History, who also gave lectures at the Berlin Faculty of Theology, Carl Schmidt gave support to his lifetime mentor Harnack.

ABSTRACT The mention of π∈ριCCON in On the Origin of the World (NHC II,5) 99,18 was in the past interpreted either as “afterbirth” (Painchaud, Layton) or “miscarriage” (Bethge). It is argued here (I.) that the context in which π∈ριCCON occurs and also its description as a watery substance don't match these interpretations. It is rather to be understood as the amniotic fluid which flows out of the womb of a pregnant woman shortly before birth. Evidence of the use of περíσσωμα in a comparable way in the gynaecological literature of late antiquity (Soranus) confirms this interpretation. In its last part (III.) the article therefore proposes a possible female authorship for On the Origin of the World since deeper insight in the actual birth process in antiquity was basically limited to the women themselves and their midwifes (only sometimes doctors as well). In its second part the article compares the passage when Yaldabaoth creates his own offspring in On the Origin of the World with a passage in The Hypostasis of the Archons where the archons try to give life (i.e. breath) to the first man they have made of dust and argues for a connection between the Coptic words ϣOγϣOγ and ϪOγϪOγ on the basis of τῦφoς/τυφώς.

ABSTRACT Starting with some reflections on the history of the “Berliner Arbeitskreis” this article discusses characteristics of the German translation of the Gospel of Thomas which was produced by this group and published in the 15th edition of the “Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum” as well as in “Nag Hammadi Deutsch”. Thereby Logion 58, the motto for he Symposium honoring Hans-Gebhard Bethge, was chosen as an example. A comparison with the first German translation, done by Johannes Leipoldt and published in 1958, gives an insight into philological and textual decisions made by the „Berliner Arbeitskreis” during the work on the Gospel of Thomas .

ABSTRACT The Gospel of Thomas with its spiritual eschatology is a timeless Platonic interpretation of the Early Christian faith. Nevertheless in its inner structure this interpretation may have been an intentional attempt to restore and re-present the realized eschatology mediated by the Holy Spirit as it was at the beginning. This was an experience that did not yet acknowledge the splitting of the Christian eschatology into the first and second coming of Jesus as the Messiah. The Thomasine group considered this early experience to be the most authentic expression of faith and tried to express it by means of a Platonic project.

ABSTRACT The essay discusses the two-part rule in Mt 7,6 in light of its parallel in Gospel of Thomas 93. This often ignored parallel, even though the closest parallel to Mt 7,6 in terms of history of religion, has a more simple structure than the text of Mt 7,6. This simple structure (rule 1 followed by its rationale, then rule 2 followed by its rationale) makes a strong argument for the interpretation of the text of Mt 7,6 as chiastic. In light of Gospel of Thomas 93, most of the common German and English translations of Mt 7,6 seem to be mistranslated.

ABSTRACT Was there another gospel named after Philip besides the gospel known from Nag-Hammadi-Codex II,3? Epiphanius and Pistis Sophia both know about a Gospel of Philip . It is rather difficult to see their testimony as a reference to Nag-Hammadi-Codex II,3, but it fits well with writings connecting Philip with the transmission of Gnostic tradition like Sophia of Jesus Christ and Letter of Peter to Philip . In addition, Acts and the Gospel of John witness to a Philip-tradition of the first century. Taken together, these references indicate an ancient and continuously developed Philip-tradition which probably started with the teaching of Philip the Hellenist, gained importance in Gnostic circles and led to the composition of at least two gospels in his name.

ABSTRACT In two seminal articles Hans Martin Schenke and his “Berliner Arbeitskreis” proposed the designation “Sethianism” for an allegedly distinctive body of Gnostic texts. His proposal was adopted and elaborated by several scholars. Focusing on the Apocryphon of John , the present essay discusses some aspects of the Sethian thesis: what is the role played by Seth and the Sethians in this important mythological text, is it correct to assume that its teachings are essentially pre-Christian Jewish?

ABSTRACT This paper explores the use and meaning of the concept of μετάνoια in Gnostic texts. It is found with regard to Sophia, Sabaoth and the soul. It expresses their avertion from the created order and its demiurge and their conversion to the real God. The main characteristics of the μετάνoια are: it starts off as an avertion, some kind of negative knowledge about reality; it involves some public display of culpability and regret; it is a demand to a graceful deity who allows for an eschatological liberation of everything that belongs to the order of creation; before this return to the pleromatic origin takes places, the repentent often stays in a place called the μετάνoια. Typical for the Gnostic μετάνoια is the fact that it has an epistemic value: it is the condition for true knowledge.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Im Gegensatz zu dem, was der rasch einsetzende und sensationheischende Strom der Veröffentlichungen nach der Entdeckung des Judasevangeliums suggeriert, betont der vorliegende Beitrag, dass das Judasevangelium keinerlei Interesse an einer Verteidigung des Judas erkennen lässt, ganz unabhängig davon, wie sehr wir es uns wünschen, die Dämonisierung des Judas, mit der nur zu oft das Vergießen jüdischen Blutes entschuldigt wurde, rückgängig zu machen. Während Judas im Neuen Testament eine entscheidende Rolle für den göttlichen Heilsplan spielt, ist das Schicksal des Judas im Judasevangelium durch seinen fehlgeleiteten Stern so vorherbestimmt, dass es zum Verrat Jesu kommt. Judas bleibt eine durchgehend ambivalente Figur: Obwohl er der Hauptgesprächspartner Jesu ist, empfängt er eine Offenbarung seines eigenen Untergangs. Das Judasevangelium wendet sich gegen die Rituale des Mehrheitschristentums seiner Zeit. So hält es etwa Opfer an den feindlich gesonnenen Schöpfergott für verfehlt und polemisiert heftig gegen die Überzeugung, Jesu Tod sei zur Sühne und Erlösung der Menschen notwendig gewesen. Indem das Judasevangelium die Unwissenheit der 12 Jünger verspottet, die ihre Anhänger gänzlich in die Irre führten, verweist es auf den Irrtum der nicht gnostischen, orthodoxen Kirche und ihrer Anführer. Judas ist einer dieser ahnungslosen Anhänger, über den Jesus ein verheerendes endgültiges Urteil fällt. Die Botschaft des Judasevangeliums verneint jegliche Hoffnung auf eine Erlösung der Menschheit, weil jeder Sterbliche unter der Kontrolle irreleitender Sterne steht und so zu ewiger Verdammnis bestimmt ist. Einzig in einem Erwachen der Irregeleiten und ihrer Annahme der rettenden Gnosis liegt eine Möglichkeit der Erlösung. Dies legt eine Verwendung des Judasevangeliums für katechetische Zwecke innerhalb der Gemeinschaft, die das Judasevangelium benutzt hat, nahe.

ABSTRACT The recently published Gospel of Judas has rapidly become a disputed text. Whilst some scholars welcome the depiction of a “good Judas”, which they believe can be found in this text, others believe that Judas is here portrayed as negatively as ever – even not more so. That Jesus calls Judas a “demon” seems to support the latter opinion. This article explores the use of the term “demon” in a range of ancient texts – the New Testament, the Nag Hammadi writings, and the Platonic tradition – discussing which might shed light on the Judas figure in the Gospel of Judas. It concludes that the question of whether Judas is presented as good or bad is misleading: Judas is neither good nor bad, but a middle figure with the ability of receiving and communicating revelation.

ABSTRACT Compared to the frequent use of the word παραβoλή in the Septuagint and the Synoptic Gospels the absence of this term in the Gospel of John prompted this investigation of the hermeneutic of the Hebrew I in accordance with its Greek translation in the Septuagint as παραβoλή and παρoιμíα respectively. Etymologically I has several meanings: “proverb”, “byword”, “reproach” and “parable”. Despite these different meanings coherence can still be found within the hermeneutical setting of the word, where it seems to signify either a positive or negative relationship between Yahweh and Israel. In the negative sense of the word it appears as “proverb”, “byword” or “reproach” indicating a broken relationship between Yahweh and Israel caused by disobedience to the Word of the Covenant. In the positive sense of the word it indicates a manifest and unique relationship between Yahweh and the one speaking the , i.e. an elect individual such as a prophet or king of Israel. Only in Ezekiel (Ez 17,2; 21,5; 24,3) the word appears in the sense of parable in accordance with the Synoptic use of the word as expressing exhortation in riddles. Where the needs a human being as medium and thus never goes forth directly from the mouth of Yahweh, the revelation of the Will of Yahweh is not expressed in , but in דבד,אמד , in Septuagint λóγoς or ῥῆμα. Though the Synoptic παραβoλή is commonly understood as a riddle or simile it is remarkable that these riddles do not appear without exhortation, which may require a reconsideration of the definition of the Synoptic παραβoλή. This in turn leads to further questions concerning the consequences of a παραβoλή-speaking Christ for the Christology. If this argument is accepted it might be possible to draw a tentative conclusion to the absence of the word παραβoλή in the Gospel of John, where the divine λóγoς is not transformed into /παραβoλή through the flesh of Jesus or by his act of speaking, but remains λóγoς, ῥῆμα and related to the positive sense of as παρoιμíα. Thus, Jesus not only gains a higher status as a prophet, but the words he speaks are more than exhortations to the Word of Yahweh, they are the Words of Yahweh.

ABSTRACT Since 40 years the „Berliner Arbeitskreis für koptisch-gnostische Schriften“ deals with the translation and interpretation of the writings of Nag Hammadi. In this time, numerous international meetings and close cooperation occured, visible in several publications. The East-West-conflict meant heavy difficulties for this, but common scientific work and personal friendship made it possible. The highly specialized research founded by Hans-Martin Schenke († 2002) is successfully continued by Hans-Gebhard Bethge and several young scholars.