No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Literature on the New Testament, 1914–1920
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 November 2011
Extract
If the scholars of various countries are to enter once more into the old fellowship of a common task, which was interrupted by the war, one of the first requirements is that all the national groups should acquaint themselves with the work done in the interval by the others. In the Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, 1921, I published for the benefit of German scholars a survey of English and American literature on the New Testament from 1914 to 1920, and I have been glad to prepare likewise for this Review, and so for American and English colleagues, a critical account of the most important works on the New Testament produced during these years in Germany and the other countries named in the title of this article.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1922
References
page 117 note 1 In consequence of the War two important bibliographical periodicals have unhappily been compelled to suspend publication, the Theologische Rundschau, in 1917, and the Theologischer Jahresbericht, the last issues of which appeared in 1914 and contain a survey of theological literature for 1918. The following are still maintained: Theologische Literaturzeitung (Leipzig, Hinrichs); Theologisches Literaturblatt (Leipzig, Dörffling und Franke); Die Theologie der Gegenwart (Leipzig, Deichert), of which one number in the year is devoted to the New Testament; Biblische Zeitschrift (Freiburg, Herder; Roman Catholic); Theologische Revue (Münster, Aschendorff; Rom. Cath.). For a very short survey see Jülicher, A., Das Neue Testament (Wissenschaftliche Forschungsberichte VI, pp. 27–45, Gotha, Perthes, 1921)Google Scholar.
page 120 note 1 On von Soden's hand-edition, see H. Lietzmann, ZNW, 1914, 823–331; R. Knopf, GGA, 1917, 385–408; E. Preuschen, BphW, 1917, No. 37.
page 122 note 1 For other contributions to the textual criticism of Vogels, see Biblz, 1914, pp. 869 ff.; 1915, 322 ff.; 1916, 84 ff.; 1921, 301 ff. Cf. also Schäfers, J.Evangelienzitate in Ephräms des Syrers Kommentar zu den paulinischen Briefen (Freiburg, Herder, 1917)Google Scholar.
page 128 note 1 See also Dausch, P., Die Zweiquellentheorie und die Glaubwürdigkeit der drei älteren Evangelien (Biblische Zeitfragen 7). Münster, Aschendorff, 1915Google Scholar.
page 131 note 1 Regarding the note ‘Ariston eriçu’ after Mk. 16, 8 in an Armenian manuscript cf. Schäfers, BiblZ, 1915, 24 f.
page 139 note 1 For a mythological interpretation of Mark 6, 48, see Windisch, H., ‘En hij wilde hen voorbijgaan’ (NThT, 1920, 298–308)Google Scholar.
page 142 note 1 Völter has contributed equally ingenious and hypothetical papers on the gospels to almost every volume of NThT., ‘Jesus am Ölberg,’ 1915, 1 ff.; ‘Die Taufe Jesu durch Johannes,’ 1917, 53 ff.; ‘Die Versuchung Jesu,’ 1917, 348 ff.; ‘Die Rede Jesu über Johannes den Täufer nebst Bemerkungen zur Rede des Täufers über Jesus,’ 1920, 76–95.
page 159 note 1 On the comma johanneum cf. also Bludau, A., ‘Das Comma johanneum bei den Griechen’ (BiblZ, 1915, 26–50Google Scholar; 130–162; 222–243).
page 161 note 1 Cf. also Rol. Schütz, , Die Vorgeschichte der johanneischen Formel δ θεòς ἀγάπη ἐστίν (dissertation). Göttingen, Hubert, 1917.Google Scholar
page 169 note 1 Under that view Gal. 2, 10 would mean: ‘The men of Jerusalem asked us to keep on remembering the poor in the future, — the very purpose for which I had actually just come to Jerusalem.’
page 170 note 1 See K. Lake and B. W. Bacon in Expositor (8th series), 8 and 9; Moffatt, Introduction to the Literature of the N. T., 3d ed., p. 622.
page 174 note 1 In the supplementary article in ZNW Hadorn appeals to the order of the epistles in the canon of Marcion: Gal., 1 Cor., 2 Cor., Bom., 1 Thess., 2 Thess., Eph., Col. Philem., Phil. This argument of course proves nothing if the internal reasons are not convincing. Jülicher (ThLZ, 1919, No. 21–22) and von Dobschütz (LZB1,1920, No. 1) reject the argument, as well as F. W. Grosheide, ‘De Methode om de volgorde der Paulinische Brieven te bepalen, in het bijzonder in verband met de Brieven aan de Thessalonicensen onderzocht’ (GerefThT, 80, 262–270, 305–319); on the other hand de Zwaan (NThSt, 1919, p. 259) seems on the whole to agree with it.
page 178 note 1 Sievers, Eduard, Metrische Studien IV, Leipzig, 1918CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
page 179 note 1 Cf. also E. Sievers, H. Lietzmann und die Schallanalyse. Eine Kritik und eine Selbstkritik (Das Neue Testament schallanalytisch untersucht. 2. Stuck). 48 pp. 1919.—For a very good review see Kittei, G., Die Schallanalyse und das Neue Testament (ThLBl, 1922, 1)Google Scholar. — H. Lietzmann is preparing a reply.
page 179 note 2 On this latter hypothesis see Harnack, ‘Über 1. Kor. 14, 82 ff. und Röm. 16, 25 ff. nach der ältesten Überlieferung und der Marcionitischen Bibel’ (SAB, 1919, 527–536), where the words καὶ τò κήρυγνα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, διά τε γραϕῶν προϕητικῶν, and γνωρισθέντος are removed as glosses, and the original form of the doxology then attributed to Marcionites. The doxology certainly could have been written by a Marcionite, but equally well by a non-marcionite follower of Paul (cf. Eph. 3, 9 f.), or even (to judge by 1 Cor. 2, 8) by Paul himself.
page 180 note 1 A second edition, with a remarkable preface, “in neuer Bearbeitung” has appeared in 1922 (xvii, 528 pp., Munich, Kaiser). Since 1921 Barth has been professor of Calvinistic (Reformed) Theology at Göttingen.
page 181 note 1 Cf. Stange, E., ‘Diktierpausen in den paulinischen Briefen’ (ZNW 18, 1818, 109–117)Google Scholar.
page 183 note 1 On the problem of Romans 7 see the dissertation of Pretorius, H. S., Bijdrage tot de exegese en de geschiedenis der exegese van Romeinen vii (Amsterdam, 1915)Google Scholar.
page 184 note 1 See also Pieper, K., Die Missionspredigt des Paulus. Ihre Fundstellen und ihr Inhalt (Predigtstudien 4). 126 pp., Paderbom, Schöningh, 1921Google Scholar.
page 191 note 1 Cf. also Reitzenstein's Hellenistische Mysterienreligionen, 2 ed. pp. 235 ff.
page 192 note 1 Cf. also Proost, K. F., ‘Adam-Christus-Satan’ (ThT, 1916, 375–386)Google Scholar.
page 204 note 1 The book ‘Jesus der Herr’ is still useful even after the appearance of the second edition of ‘Kyrios Christos.’