DOCSLIB.ORG

In 7:25, the Apostle Paul Says: “Now Concerning Virgins, I Do Not Have A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In 7:25, the Apostle Paul Says: “Now Concerning Virgins, I Do Not Have A FIRST CORINTHIANS 7 AS EXPANDED JESUS TRADITION by MELVIN GAMBLE MILLER submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY in the subject of NEW TESTAMENT at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA PROMOTER: PROF PJJ BOTHA JUNE 2013 SUMMARY This dissertation attempts to answer the questions, “What is the most appropriate background for understanding Paul’s views on marriage, celibacy and divorce as found in 1 Corinthians 7?” and “How do we account for the unique features in 1 Corinthians that are not clearly delineated in the Greco-Roman works, Jesus tradition or in other NT writings?” This work argues that Paul derives the substance of his perspective on marriage, celibacy and divorce directly from the Jewish Scriptures (LXX) and the uniquely motivated Jesus tradition to which he was exposed. Paul’s reception of this Jesus tradition can be traced to first generation believers as well as to his own revelatory religious experience. Such a proposal does not preclude Paul from being significantly influenced by his social context, but suggests that he was acutely aware of the philosophical differences between himself and other thinkers of his day. This work follows the contention that Hellenism only affected the ‘outer shell’ of Paul’s brand of Pharisaism (Hengel). What is more, the Apostle openly uses this Jesus tradition when the situations of his missionary churches paralleled those confronted by Jesus and seems to have expanded upon it when he had no explicit tradition from which to draw as new situations arose within his communities. 1 | P a g e Table of Contents PREFACE .................................................................................................................. 6 CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 7 1.1 The Problems of Communication and Perspectives ............................................. 9 1.2 The Problem of Methodology ............................................................................ 14 1.3 “Paralellomania” and the Debate on Jesus and Paul .......................................... 17 1.4 Hypotheses Presented in this Study ................................................................... 22 1.5 Overview of Thesis Chapters ............................................................................. 27 CHAPTER 2 THE APOSTLE PAUL ON MARRIAGE, CELIBACY AND DIVORCE IN 1 CORINTHIANS 7: A REVIEW OF SELECTED SCHOLARS .............................. 29 2.1 BEFORE BULTMANN: .................................................................................... 30 2.1.1 Ferdinand Christian Baur (1831) ................................................................ 33 2.1.2 Frédéric Godet (1889) ................................................................................. 35 2.1.3 J. B. Lightfoot (1895).................................................................................. 37 2.1.4 William Wrede (1904) ................................................................................ 39 2.1.5 Wilhelm Lütgert (1908) .............................................................................. 40 2.1.6 Albert Schweitzer (1912) ............................................................................ 41 2.1.7 Johannes Weiss (1925) ............................................................................... 44 2.1.8 Gerhard Delling (1931) ............................................................................... 45 2.1.9 Pre-Bultmann Conclusions: ........................................................................ 46 2.2 BULTMANN: .................................................................................................... 49 2.2.1 Rudolf Bultmann (1948) ............................................................................. 49 2.2.2 Bultmann Conclusions: ............................................................................... 52 2.3 AFTER BULTMANN: ...................................................................................... 54 2.3.1 W.D. Davies (1955) .................................................................................... 54 2.3.2 Walter Schmithals (1956) ........................................................................... 55 2.3.3 Ernst Käsemann (1969)............................................................................... 57 2.3.4 David L. Dungan (1971) ............................................................................. 58 2.3.5 David Balch, Robin Scroggs (1972) ........................................................... 60 2.3.6 David Cartlidge, Kurt Niederwimmer (1975) ............................................. 64 2.3.7 Orr and Walther (1976) ............................................................................... 66 2 | P a g e 2.3.8 D. L. Balch, C. M.Tuckett, Elisabeth Fiorenza (1983) ............................... 68 2.3.9 O. L. Yarbrough (1985) .............................................................................. 72 2.3.10 Vincent L. Wimbush (1987) ....................................................................... 75 2.3.11 Wolfgang Schrage (1988) ........................................................................... 76 2.3.12 Antoinette C. Wire (1990) .......................................................................... 77 2.3.13 Will Deming (1995) .................................................................................... 78 2.3.14 Dale B Martin (1997) .................................................................................. 81 2.3.15 David Fredrickson (2003) ........................................................................... 83 2.3.16 Post-Bultmannian Conclusions: .................................................................. 84 CHAPTER 3 COMPARING PATTERNS-OF-RELIGION: MORAL PHILOSOPHY, JUDAISM AND PAUL .................................................................................................... 93 3.1 PRELIMINARY Considerations ....................................................................... 96 3.1.1 A Methodological Note: E. P. Sanders’ Pattern of Religion ...................... 96 3.1.2 Hellenistic Philosophy: A Brief Historical Sketch ..................................... 97 3.1.3 Second-Temple Judaism: A Brief Historical Sketch ................................ 107 3.2 Greco-Roman Views on Life-After Death ....................................................... 114 3.2.1 Greco-Roman Philosophy and Religion on Life-After Death .................. 114 3.2.2 Epicureanism: ........................................................................................... 119 3.2.3 Cynicism ................................................................................................... 120 3.2.4 Stoicism..................................................................................................... 121 3.2.5 Secularists ................................................................................................. 123 3.2.6 Judaism ..................................................................................................... 125 3.2.7 Christian Eschatology ............................................................................... 144 3.3 Greco-Roman Views on the Marriage, Celibacy and Divorce......................... 170 3.3.1 Greco-Roman Sexuality ............................................................................ 170 3.3.2 Marriage, Celibacy and Divorce among Greeks and Romans .................. 176 3.3.3 Jewish Attitudes Regarding Women, Marriage, Celibacy and Divorce ... 191 3.3.4 Marriage, Celibacy and Divorce among Christians .................................. 203 CHAPTER 4 THE PROBLEM OF DIFFERENTIATION: UNDERSTANDING THE IMPETUS BEHIND PAUL’S VIEWS ON GENDER RELATIONS ........................... 213 4.1 Judaism and the Question of Differentiation.................................................... 218 3 | P a g e 4.2 Factors in Differentiation ................................................................................. 223 4.3 Paul, Pharisaism and Differentiation:............................................................... 227 4.4 Differentiation and Sexual Ethics .................................................................... 232 CHAPTER 5 PAUL’S DEPENDENCY UPON JESUS TRADITION FOR HIS VIEWS ON MARRIAGE, CELIBACY AND DIVORCE ............................................ 238 5.1 Tradition and the Early Church: ....................................................................... 239 5.2 Paul’s Exposure to Jesus Tradition: ................................................................. 243 5.3 Agreement between Jesus and Paul ................................................................. 245 CHAPTER 6 1 CORINTHIANS 7 AS EXPANDED JESUS TRADITION .............. 256 6.1 EXEGESIS OF 1 COR 7 .................................................................................. 270 6.1.1 Paul on Marriage: ...................................................................................... 271 6.1.2 Paul on Divorce: ....................................................................................... 278 6.1.3 Paul on Celibacy: ...................................................................................... 289 CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS AND ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTIONS .................. 300 7.1 Academic Contributions ................................................................................... 300 7.2 Conclusion and Summary of the Need for Further Research..........................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Albert Schweitzer and the Interpretation of the New Testament David J
    297 Albert Schweitzer and the Interpretation of the New Testament David J. Hawkin A friend of mine recently complained to me that scholars in Biblical studies are obsessed with method. ‘Biblical studies is far more concerned with how you interpret the Bible than it is with what the text actually means,’ she claimed. This is, of course, quite untrue. A quick perusal of any publisher’s catalogue would reveal that only a small proportion of publications in Biblical studies is devoted to methodology and how one interprets texts. But it was interesting that my friend’s perception was otherwise. Why did she think this? I think that what she had noticed was that the biblical studies area is very rich in methods and had mistaken this for an obsession with method itself. Biblical studies was not always so methodologically enhanced. It is only in relatively recent times that it has become such a creative and imaginative enterprise. But although the full flowering of Biblical methodology is relatively recent, the seeds for such flowering were sown over a century ago by a man whose own study of the New Testament was quite limited in terms of method. That man was Albert Schweitzer. Schweitzer is well known as a great humanitarian and as a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. He was a truly remarkable man. He was a renowned musician, a medical doctor who devoted his life to building and running a hospital in Lambaréné in Gabon, and a great Biblical scholar. Perhaps his best known writing is The Quest of the Historical Jesus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Critical and Dogmatic Agenda of Albert Schweitzer's the Quest of The
    Tyndale Bulletin 51.2 (2000) 261-283. THE CRITICAL AND DOGMATIC AGENDA OF ALBERT SCHWEITZER’S THE QUEST OF THE HISTORICAL JESUS S.J. Gathercole Summary This article seeks to explore the twofold agenda of Schweitzer’s The Quest for the Historical Jesus. The first element is well-known and obvious: Schweitzer’s intention to put to death the ‘liberal German’ Jesus and to reinstate the true historical Jesus whose preaching and actions were wholly eschatological in orientation. The second element lies below the surface, and this article argues that Schweitzer structured the book around Reimarus, Strauss, Weiss and himself, as they aim to show the impossibility of maintaining Jesus’ own dogmatic construction of eschatology in the modern era. It is also demonstrated (against some current understandings) that Schweitzer’s reconstruction of Jesus’ eschatology does not simply involve Jesus’ belief in the end of the space-time universe. I. Introduction The translator’s introduction to Schweitzer’s The Mystery of the Kingdom of God, his earliest work, describes the initial reaction of the German theological establishment to him.1 Schweitzer’s maverick dissertation was seriously questioned by two members of the Strassburg faculty who examined it: there was concern that Schweitzer’s ‘sort’ of historical research would confuse students. 1 The dissertation qualified Schweitzer for the position of Privat-dozent at Strassburg and was published as: Das Messianitäts- und Leidensgeheimnis. Eine Skizze des Lebens Jesu (Tübingen: Mohr, 1901). This was translated by W. Lowrie, along with his ‘Translator’s Introduction’, as The Mystery of the Kingdom of God: The Secret of Jesus’ Messiahship and Passion (London: A.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination
    1 Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination An Introduction Ben C. Blackwell, John K. Goodrich, and Jason Maston Problematizing Apocalyptic in Pauline Scholarship Over the course of the last century, the place of apocalyptic has grown increasingly prominent in Pauline studies. Following from Käsemann’s now famous dictum that “apocalyptic was the mother of all Christian theology,”1 it is now almost universally affirmed that Paul had an apocalyptic worldview. As Barry Matlock acknowledged (in fact, protested) some years ago, “‘Apocalyptic’ interpretation of Paul is, if not a consensus, then certainly a commonplace.”2 Beyond this basic affirmation, however, there is little consensus regarding what the label 1. Ernst Käsemann, “The Beginnings of Christian Theology,” in New Testament Questions of Today, trans. W. J. Montague (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969), 82–107, at 102. 2. R. Barry Matlock, Unveiling the Apocalyptic Paul: Paul’s Interpreters and the Rhetoric of Criticism, JSNTSup 127 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 11. 3 PAUL AND THE APOCALYPTIC IMAGINATION “apocalyptic” actually suggests about Paul’s theological perspective. Indeed, lying conspicuously behind the employment of common language are many different definitions, and even competing interpretations of Paul’s letters.3 As N. T. Wright remarks, “this term has proved so slippery and many-sided in scholarly discourse that one is often tempted to declare a moratorium on it altogether.”4 Since the term is unlikely to disappear from the scholarly vocabulary in the immediate future, what is needed now is a forum for clarifying the nature of apocalyptic language as it is currently being used in relation to Paul.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CRITICAL WORK of JOHANNES Weisst
    216 THEOLOGY difficulty in explaining the origin of Paulinism will never dis­ appear by being ignored; it will never yield to compromises of 'any kind. It will disappear only when Jesus is recognized as being really what Paul presupposes Him to be and what all the Gospels represent Him as being-the eternal Son of God, come to earth for the redemption of man, now seated once more on the throne of His glory, and working in the hearts of His disciples through His Spirit, as only God can work. Such a solution was never so unpopular as it is to-day. Acceptance of it will involve a Copernican revolution in many departments of human thought and life. But refusal of such acceptance has left an historical problem which so far has not been solved." * Si cette solution est repoussee, ce n'est pas seulement l'exegese et l'histoire qui s'embarrassent de difficultes insolubles; c'est la vie de tous les chretiens, c'est la vie de l'Eglise qui se perd sans espoir. II est trop vrai que cette solution est impopu­ laire en dehors des milieux catholiques, ce nous sera un nouveau motif de feliciter Ie Dr. Relton d'avoir si courageusement de­ fendu cette these vitale, et de l'avoir fait avec tant de talent. JULES LEBRETON. THE CRITICAL WORK OF JOHANNES WEISSt (I.) IT might have been expected that so considerable a scholar as Johannes Weiss would have left behind him some friend or pupil who would tell the story of his life and attempt some estimate of his character and work.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus the Victim Author(S): Helmut Koester Reviewed Work(S): Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol
    Jesus the Victim Author(s): Helmut Koester Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 111, No. 1 (Spring, 1992), pp. 3-15 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3267506 . Accessed: 06/04/2012 10:49 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature. http://www.jstor.org JBL 111/1(1992) 3-15 JESUS THE VICTIM* HELMUT KOESTER Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138 I. The Original Quest of the Historical Jesus In the second half of the nineteenth century, Albrecht Ritschl, the influential theologian who taught for many decades at the University of GCttingen, defined the kingdom of God as the achievement of the universal moral community. This, he proposed, is the goal of the divine action in the world and the purpose of the ministry of Jesus. As God's action is motivated by his love, Jesus incorporates this love in his teaching as well as in his suffer- ing and death. Jesus indeed is God, but only insofar as he represents fully God's moral purpose for humankind.
    [Show full text]
  • Professor Laurence Welborn
    SSEC eNewsletter Newsletter 74 September 2012 Special Feature: in this issue • SSEC Recent Events • SSEC Modern Church Fathers Series Professor - Adam Smith by Professor Paul Oslington - Johannes Weiss by Rev Jeff Cayzer • SSEC Travel Report by Adam White • Accolades for Professor Alanna Nobbs Laurence • Sir Asher Joel Foundation • “The Palatine Graffito: A Mimic Interpretation” by Professor Laurence Welborn • In Print : Appreciation by Dr Christopher Forbes Welborn • Non- SSEC activities • SSEC Calendar From the President’s Desk “The unique Welcome to our September 2012 Newsletter. Thank you sincerely emphasis of our for all the emails, phone calls and comments that I received in June 2012 when found out that I was listed as a Member of the Order of Society is one Australia (AM). As you can appreciate, I was delighted to see the Society for the Study of Early Christianity named in the citation. of history. The See page 4. study of Early As for what the Society has achieved since our last Newsletter, we have had a very full & productive program of events as follows: Christianity in In June we had a fascinating topic Myth in the Near East by Dr Noel its Jewish and Weeks, formerly Sydney University & Honorary Research Fellow Macquarie University. Graeoc Roman In July, our function coincided with the Macquarie Ancient Lan- Setting.” guages School (MALS), and we welcomed many MALS participants to hear our speaker Luigi Prada (Oxford). He spoke on The Origins of Coptic: A Script Christian by Choice, Not by Birth. SSEC Newsletter SSEC Newsletter is published three times In August we had two very successful events.
    [Show full text]
  • Did Paul's View of the Resurrection of the Dead Undergo Development? Ben F
    Theological Studies 47 (1986) DID PAUL'S VIEW OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD UNDERGO DEVELOPMENT? BEN F. MEYER McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada S IT not a remarkable thing that you should have started the idea— I and the word—Development, as the key to the history of church doctrine, and since then it has gradually become the dominant idea of all history, biology, physics, and in short has metamorphosed our view of every science, and of all knowledge?" So wrote Mark Pattison to John Henry Newman in 1878,1 33 years after the publication of Newman's Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine.2 Rarely had a single idea so rapidly and thoroughly transformed a whole culture's field of vision. This implies, to be sure, that Newman had had predecessors and allies of sorts as well as kindred and alien successors. Among the predecessors was G. W. F. Hegel, whose triad of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis impinged on biblical history and exegesis espe­ cially through the work of Ferdinand Christian Baur.3 By the end of the century "development" had established itself in biblical studies as an indispensable heuristic resource. Likewise, by century's end Richard Kabisch and Johannes Weiss had discovered "eschatology" as the very form of early Christian consciousness, aspiration, and reflection.4 Soon Albert Schweitzer would so effectively thematize the issue of eschatology as to make it foundational for the exegesis of the New Testament, the history of religions (Judeo-Christian sector), and New Testament theol­ ogy. Moreover, these two thought-forms, "development" and "eschatol- 1 See Owen Chadwick, From Bossuet to Newman: The Idea of Doctrinal Development (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1957) x.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship of Biblical Studies to the History of Religions School, with Reference to the Scientific Study of Religion1
    02_tjt24.2_ludemann.qxd 4/23/2009 10:52 AM Page 171 GERD LÜDEMANN The Relationship of Biblical Studies to the History of Religions School, with Reference to the Scientific Study of Religion1 The Current State of Affairs and Nineteenth-Century Background Theologians both Catholic and Protestant have consistently assumed theology to be related to the Church. This reflects the idea that theology is a confessional discipline. In Germany the close binding of theology to the Church was strength- ened after the First World War and persisted through the Nazi era. Since then this bond has in fact underpinned the growing significance of Church development worldwide. The roots of this correlation of Church and theology are found as early as the nineteenth century. Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834) decreed: “Even the scientific activity of the theologian must have for its object the pro- motion of the Church’s welfare—and partakes, therefore, of a clerical charac- ter.”2 In a similar vein, Albrecht Ritschl (1822–1889) remarked that “theology is only conceivable as service to the Christian religious community.”3 The most influential theologian of the twentieth century, Karl Barth (1886–1968), immediately affirmed the aim of theology by the title of his main work—Church Dogmatics. In this view of dogmatics as foundational to church teaching, preachers are officially forbidden to impart in their homilies such his- torical insights as the non-historicity of the virgin birth. “[The Church] will at least require of its servants, even if there are some who personally cannot under- stand this ordinance, that they treat their private road as a private road and do GERD LÜDEMANN is Professor of History and Literature in Early Christianity, Georg-August- University, Göttingen, Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • Save Pdf (0.31
    HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW VOLUME VIII JULY, 1915 NUMBER 3 JOHANNES WEISS: IN MEMORIAM F. CRAWFORD BURKITT UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND The death of Johannes Weiss, Professor of New Testa- ment Exegesis in the University of Heidelberg, which took place last August, is a loss to sound learning which ought not to pass uncommemorated, even in the midst of the clash of arms and of national rivalry; and when it was suggested to me that I should write on the sub- ject for The Harvard Theological Review, I was very glad to do so. In some ways, it is true, I cannot regard myself as an altogether suitable person. I did not know Professor Weiss personally and I have not read all his numerous contributions to New Testament studies; so I shall not attempt any balanced estimate of his work. What I chiefly desire to do is to put on record the out- standing and permanent sense of respect and gratitude which all supporters of what Schweitzer calls "thorough- going eschatology" must feel towards the author of the Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes. Johannes Weiss was born at Kiel at the end of 1863, where his father, Bernhard Weiss, who is still alive in extreme old age, was himself Professor of New Testament Exegesis. In 1890 Johannes Weiss became Professor at Gbttingen; in 1895 he moved to Marburg, and from 1908 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.202.58, on 23 Sep 2021 at 15:41:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus DENNIS C
    Word & World 2/2 (1982) Copyright © 1982 by Word & World, Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN. All rights reserved. page 117 The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus DENNIS C. DULING Canisius College, Buffalo, New York Modern scholars have agreed with the synoptic evangelists that the center of Jesus’ message was his proclamation of the Kingdom of God (Hebrew: malkuth Yahweh; Greek: he basileia tou theou) or Kingdom of Heaven. They have not, however, always agreed on what the language of the Kingdom meant—or means. The historical question today is one that emerged about the turn of the century: to what extent did Jesus of Nazareth proclaim an apocalyptic eschatological Kingdom of God? This simple question, however, can be divided into a number of more complex and interlocking questions about the relation of Jesus to the Judaism out of which he came and to the early Christianity which perpetuated his message. Moreover, even if such questions can be answered, there is still the hermeneutical problem as to whether democratically- minded, technocratic Christians working for a “better world” can interpret language about kings and kingdoms spoken by a figure who lived long ago and far away. This problem takes on heightened significance if one is convinced that Jesus expected this “better world” to end! It is impossible to address all of these questions in a short article. Therefore, I propose to sketch only the contours of the attempt to interpret the Kingdom of God, especially in the modern period. Such a sketch runs the risk of oversimplification; at the same time, I engage in the task hoping to clarify the major issues in any interpretation of the Kingdom of God in the teaching of Jesus.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications on Defining the Kingdom of God in BAM Businesses
    religions Article Thy Kingdom Come in BAM as It Is in Heaven: Implications on Defining the Kingdom of God in BAM Businesses Ben Ward Applied Ministry and Student Life, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY 40280, USA; [email protected] Abstract: Business as Mission (BAM) is a subcategory of Social Entrepreneurship as it seeks cultural innovation from a Christian perspective focusing specifically on economic uplift and religious direction. Most BAM authors describe the kingdom of God as the reign of God. In a theological review, I will show that defining kingdom simply as God’s rule is not a complete view of the kingdom. Rather, a more robust definition of the kingdom is preferred in biblical and theological studies that focuses on God’s people in God’s place under God’s rule. Therefore, the BAM community can adopt a refined definition that helps them move forward in the core vision of holistic ministry. This research provides a biblical and theological understanding for business practitioners to pursue a spiritual bottom line alongside local churches. Keywords: business as mission; kingdom of God; spiritual bottom line; local church 1. Introduction Citation: Ward, Ben. 2021. Thy Business as Mission (BAM) is a for-profit business in a cross cultural setting with a goal Kingdom Come in BAM as It Is in to participate in God’s mission in the world (Johnson 2009). From a Christian perspective, Heaven: Implications on Defining the BAM is a subcategory of Social Entrepreneurship (SE) as it focuses on cultural goals for the Kingdom of God in BAM Businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Walter Bauer 1877–1960
    New Test. Stud, g, pp. 1-2. EDITOR'S NOTE Walter Bauer, who died on 17 November i960, was one of the great New Testament Gelehrten of this century. His lexicon of New Testament Greek has become a standard work and is now available in English translation {A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, translated by William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, Cambridge University Press, 1957). The suggestion that tribute might be paid to the life-work of this great scholar in Mew Testament Studies was first made by Professor C. F. D. Moule, and I am grateful to him, to Dr Bammel, Lecturer in Divinity in Cambridge, and to the late Dr Peter Walters, for their co-operation and advice, and to the contributors of the articles on Dr Bauer as New Testament and patristic scholar: Dr Gingrich has contributed a short biographical note and Dr W. Barclay of Glasgow a review of the English edition of the lexicon. 30 June ig62 ST MARY'S COLLEGE, ST ANDREWS WALTER BAUER 1877-1960 Walter Bauer was born on 8 August 1877 in Konigsberg, Prussia, the son of a professor in the university of that city. He studied theology and philology (both classical and oriental) at the universities of Marburg, Berlin, and Strassburg with such scholars as Jiilicher, Johannes Weiss, Harnack, Pfleiderer, Holtzmann, Noldeke, and F. Spitta. He began his teaching career as Privatdozent at Marburg in 1902. The title of his inaugural dissertation as Licentiat der Theologie in that year was 'Mundige und Unmundige bei dem Apostel Paulus': at this early date he showed keen competence in New Testament lexicography, which became his major work.
    [Show full text]