Volume 111, Issue 2

Pseudepigraphy is a widespread and complex phenomenon in ancient Greek culture. Numerous letters are attributed to famous historical figures, especially in the first and second century. The letters of Themistocles offer a useful case study of pseudepigraphy of this kind. The purpose of the letters is still under discussion. Several interpretations are proposed by scholars (sometimes combined with one another), e. g. worthless forgery, epistolary novel, prosopopoiia, fictional self-biography. One of the most interesting questions is whether there is any evidence for a “fictional contract” between author and reader (“open” pseudepigraphy, epistolary fictions). In many respects, research on the letters of Themistocles and related literature may open up new perspectives for the study of New Testament pseudepigraphy.

This article aims at describing the Lukan project by applying – in the wake of other scholars – social memory theories to Luke’s double work. In particular, it argues that the type of memory and its criteria defined by Jan Assmann on the basis of the Deuteronomy can help explain the nature of the narrative composed by the  auctor ad Theophilum  as well as its originality in an early Christian context marked by a proliferation of books and other traditions of the origins of the Church (cf. Luke 1:1a.2.4).

In New Testament exegesis, quotations from Latin literature of the Early Principate are mostly used as evidence of Roman imperial ideology. This essay aims to show that it is worthwhile to deal more carefully with such literary texts. Horace’s seventh and sixteenth epodes are compared with passages from the letter to the Romans. Using the myth of Romulus’ fratricide, Horace expresses his despair during the civil wars. He imagines a fictional rescue by fleeing from Rome to a primeval “pre-lapsarian” paradise. Paul uses the myth of Adam and Eve to portray human captivity under sin from which Christ saves people from all nations. The parallels are not mere coincidence.

This contribution aims to explain the controversy about glossolalia between the members of the Corinthian church and Paul. Corinthian glossolalia will be placed in the context of ancient texts on voice and language from medicine, philosophy, grammar, rhetoric and music and – taking up Bleek’s thesis – connected with expressions called “glosses”. The glossolalia is thus placed in the realm of the use of language in poetry. Paul uses arguments from philosophical polemics against poetry and places language exclusively in the realms of justice and truth.

Paul’s expression in 1Cor 15,37, γυμνὸς κόκκος, has nothing whatsoever to do with a Platonist naked soul or Stoic imagery of sowing and seeds. The context itself indicates that an immortal Platonic soul is not the reference of γυμνὸς κόκκος. The Platonist texts and the Stoic imagery of sowing and seeds do not resemble Paul’s affirmations in 1Cor 15,37. Instead, texts from Greek biology and agriculture are far more illuminating. The naked seed of 1Cor 15,37 are a metaphor for sown dead bodies. The context and comparative texts indicate Paul’s fundamental analogy: the naked seed is to the sown body as the plant body is to the body that will be.