With characteristic boldness and careful reassessment of the evidence, MacDonald offers an alternative reconstruction of Q and an alternative solution to the Synoptic Problem: the Q+/Papias Hypothesis. To do so, he reconstructs and interprets two lost books about Jesus: the earliest Gospel, which was used as a source by the authors of Mark, Matthew, and Luke; and the earliest commentary on the Gospels, by Papias of Hierapolis, who apparently knew Mark, Matthew, and the lost Gospel, which he considered to be an alternative Greek translation of a Semitic Matthew. MacDonald also explores how these two texts, well known into the fourth century, shipwrecked with the canonization of the New Testament and the embarrassment at outmoded eschatologies in both the lost Gospel and Papias s Exposition.

The international conference held in Limerick, Ireland, in May 2005 produced far more than the usual collection of loosely related papers. Rather, this volume from the 17 contributors demarcates and organizes a whole field, serving as an indispensable introduction to intertextuality in general, and as an original examination of the topic in relation to the New Testament epistles. CONTENTS Thomas L. Brodie, Dennis R. MacDonald and Stanley E. Porter Introduction: Tracing the Development of the Epistles: The Potential and the Problem PART I. ASPECTS OF THEORY, PRACTICE AND RELATED RESEARCH Susanne Gillmayr-Bucher Intertextuality: Between Literary Theory and Text Analysis Steve Moyise Intertextuality, Historical Criticism and Deconstruction Peter Phillips Biblical Studies and Intertextuality: Should the Work of Genette and Eco Broaden our Horizons? Erkki Koskenniemi Josephus and Greek Poets Jon Paulien Elusive Allusions in the Apocalypse: Two Decades of Research into John's Use of the Old Testament PART II. FROM THE OT TO THE EPISTLES Thomas L. Brodie The Triple Intertextuality of the Epistles. Introduction Lukas Bormann Triple Intertextuality in Philippians Stanley E. Porter Further Comments on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament PART III. FROM EPISTLE TO EPISTLE Annette Merz The Fictitious Self-Exposition of Paul: How Might Intertextual Theory Suggest a Reformulation of the Hermeneutics of Pseudepigraphy? Hanna Roose 2 Thessalonians as Pseudepigraphic Reading Instruction for 1 Thessalonians: Methodological Implications and Exemplary Illustration of an Intertextual Concept J. Michael Gilchrist Intertextuality and the Pseudonymity of 2 Thessalonians Outi Leppa 2 Thessalonians among the Pauline Letters: Tracing the Literary Links between 2 Thessalonians and Other Pauline Epistles David J. Clark Structural Similarities in 1 and 2 Thessalonians: Comparative Discourse Anatomy IV. FROM EPISTLE TO NARRATIVE (GOSPEL/ACTS) Dennis R. MacDonald A Categorization of Antetextuality in the Gospels and Acts: A Case For Luke's Imitation of Plato and Xenophon to Depict Paul as a Christian Socrates Paul Elbert Possible Literary Links between Luke-Acts and Pauline Letters Regarding Spirit-Language Heikki Leppa Reading Galatians with and without the Book of Acts Mike Sommer A Better Class of Enemy: Opposition and Dependence in the Johannine Writings Thomas L. Brodie, Dennis R. MacDonald, Stanley E. Porter Problems Of Method: Suggested Guidelines

In a riveting and groundbreaking collection of essays, a distinguished group of scholars examines the ways in which early Christian writers practiced mimesis the conscious imitation of literary models from the Greco-Roman world. While the study of intertextuality has influenced deeply the study of the Synoptic Gospels and other early Christian texts, few scholars of early Christian literature have enriched their observations with studies of mimesis. The apocryphal Acts of Andrew, for instance, contains extensive imitation of Homeric and Euripidean poetry, and both Luke-Acts and Mark contain extensive imitation of the Homeric epics. These essays examine the phenomenon of mimesis and intertextuality through an in-depth examination of particular texts, ranging from the apocryphal book of Tobit to Luke-Acts and the Synoptic Gospels. Contributors include: Francois Bovon (Harvard Divinity School); Thomas Louis Brodie (Dominican House of Study, Dublin, Ireland); Ellen Finkelpearl (Scripps College); Ronald F. Hock (University of Southern California); George W. E. Nickelsburg (University of Iowa); Judith Perkins (Saint Joseph College); and Gregory J. Riley (Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University). Dennis R. MacDonald teaches at the Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University and Director of the Institute for Antiquity and Christianity. He is the author of Christianizing Homer: The "Odyssey," Plato, and the Acts of Andrew and Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark. For: Graduate students; general audience; professors; literary scholars>

From the Earliest Gospel (Q+) to the Gospel of Mark focuses on the remarkable overlaps between Jesus’s teachings in the lost Gospel Q and Mark. Dennis R. MacDonald argues Synoptic intertextuality is best explained not as the redaction of sources but more flexibly as the imitation of literary models. Part One applies the criteria of mimesis criticism in a running commentary on Q+ to demonstrate that it polemically imitated Deuteronomy. Part Two argues that Mark in turn tendentiously imitated Logoi. The Conclusion proposes that Matthew and Luke in turn brilliantly and freely imitated both Logoi and Mark and by doing so created scores of duplicate sayings and episodes (doublets).

Luke and the Politics of Homeric Imitation: Luke-Acts as Rival to the Aeneid argues that the author of Luke-Acts composed not a history but a foundation mythology to rival Vergil's Aeneid by adopting and ethically emulating the cultural capital of classical Greek poetry, especially Homer's Iliad and Odyssey and Euripides's Bacchae. For example, Vergil and, more than a century later, Luke both imitated Homer's account of Zeus's lying dream to Agamemnon, Priam's escape from Achilles, and Odysseus's shipwreck and visit to the netherworld. Both Vergil and Luke, as well as many other intellectuals in the Roman Empire, engaged the great poetry of the Greeks to root new social or political realities in the soil of ancient Hellas, but they also rivaled Homer's gods and heroes to create new ones that were more moral, powerful, or compassionate. One might say that the genre of Luke-Acts is an oxymoron: a prose epic. If this assessment is correct, it holds enormous importance for understanding Christian origins, in part because one may no longer appeal to the Acts of the Apostles for reliable historical information. Luke was not a historian any more than Vergil was, and, as the Latin bard had done for the Augustine age, he wrote a fictional portrayal of the kingdom of God and its heroes, especially Jesus and Paul, who were more powerful, more ethical, and more compassionate than the gods and heroes of Homer and Euripides or those of Vergil's Aeneid.

"Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them." Dennis R. MacDonald offers a provocative explanation of those scandalous words of Christ from the Fourth Gospel-an explanation that he argues would hardly have surprised some of the Gospel's early readers. John sounds themes that would have instantly been recognized as proper to the Greek god Dionysos (the Roman Bacchus), not least as he was depicted in Euripides's play The Bacchae. A divine figure, the offspring of a divine father and human mother, takes on flesh to live among mortals, but is rejected by his own. He miraculously provides wine and offers it as a sacred gift to his devotees, women prominent among them, dies a violent death-and returns to life. Yet John takes his drama in a dramatically different direction: while Euripides's Dionysos exacts vengeance on the Theban throne, the Johannine Christ offers life to his followers. MacDonald employs mimesis criticism to argue that the earliest Evangelist not only imitated Euripides but expected his readers to recognize Jesus as greater than Dionysos.

These two volumes of The New Testament and Greek Literature are the magnum opus of biblical scholar Dennis R. MacDonald, outlining the profound connections between the New Testament and classical Greek poetry. MacDonald argues that the Gospel writers borrowed from established literary sources to create stories about Jesus that readers of the day would find convincing. In The Gospels and Homer MacDonald leads readers through Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, highlighting models that the authors of the Gospel of Mark and Luke-Acts may have imitated for their portrayals of Jesus and his earliest followers such as Paul. The book applies mimesis criticism to show the popularity of the targets being imitated, the distinctiveness in the Gospels, and evidence that ancient readers recognized these similarities. Using side-by-side comparisons, the book provides English translations of Byzantine poetry that shows how Christian writers used lines from Homer to retell the life of Jesus. The potential imitations include adventures and shipwrecks, savages living in cages, meals for thousands, transfigurations, visits from the dead, blind seers, and more. MacDonald makes a compelling case that the Gospel writers successfully imitated the epics to provide their readers with heroes and an authoritative foundation for Christianity.

These two volumes of The New Testament and Greek Literature are the magnum opus of biblical scholar Dennis R. MacDonald, outlining the profound connections between the New Testament and classical Greek poetry. MacDonald argues that the Gospel writers borrowed from established literary sources to create stories about Jesus that readers of the day would find convincing. In Luke and Vergil MacDonald proposes that the author of Luke-Acts followed Mark's lead in imitating Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, but greatly expanded his project, especially in the Acts, but adding imitations not only of the epics but also of Euripides' Bacchae and Plato's Socratic dialogues. The potential imitations include spectacular miracles, official resistance, epiphanies, prison breaks, and more. The book applies mimesis criticism and uses side-by-side comparisons to show how early Christian authors portrayed the origins of Christianity as more compelling than the Augustan Golden Age.