While much work has been done on the role of Jews in the crucifixion of Jesus in post-Holocaust biblical scholarship, the question of violence in subsequent community formation remains largely unexamined. New Testament passages suggesting that early Christ-believers were violently persecuted--the "stone throwing" passages from John, the "persecuted from town to town" passages in Matthew, the stoning of Stephen in Acts, Paul's hardship catalogue in II Corinthians, etc.-- are frequently read positivistically as windows onto first century persecution; at the other extreme, they are sometimes dismissed as completely a-historical. In either case, scholars up until now have provided little in the way of methodological reflection on how they have reached such conclusions. A further problematic issue in previous readings of passages suggesting such violence is that the perpetrators of violence are frequently cast as "Jews" while the violated are cast as "Christians," in spite of the growing consensus that it is impossible to tease out these two distinct and separate religious identities, Jew and Christian, from first century texts. This volume takes up crucial methodological questions about how to read passages suggesting violence among Jews in texts that eventually became part of the New Testament canon. It situates this intra-religious violence within the violence of the Roman Imperial order. It provides new readings of these texts that move beyond the "Jew as violator"/"Christian as violated" binary.

E. Leigh Gibson analyses a little-known group of Greek inscriptions that record the manumission of slaves in synagogues located on the hellenized north shore of the Black Sea in the first three centuries of the common era. Through a comparison of this corpus with manumission inscriptions from elsewhere in the Greco-Roman world and an analysis of Greco-Roman Judaism's own interaction with slavery, she assesses the degree to which the Black Sea Jewish community adopted classical traditions of manumissions. In so doing, she tests the often-repeated assumption that these Jewish communities developed idiosyncratic slave practices under the influence of biblical injunctions regarding Israelite ownership of slaves. More generally, she reconsiders the extent of Jewish isolation from or interaction with Greco-Roman culture. Against the backdrop of Greek manumission inscriptions, the Jewish manumissions of the Bosporan Kingdom are unremarkable; they follow the basic outlines of Greek manumission formulae. A review of Greco-Roman Jewish sources demonstrates that biblical precepts on slaveholding were not implemented, even if they were still admired. One element of the manumissions, the ongoing obligation required of the slaves, is somewhat enigmatic and possibly indicates that the Bosporan Jewish community indeed had distinctive manumission practices. These obligations have been commonly interpreted as requiring the slave to participate in the religious life of the community as a condition of his manumission and possibly his concurrent conversion. A close analysis of the clause reveals a more straightforward interpretation: the obligation was a kind of paramone clause, a common feature of Greek manumission inscriptions. E. Leigh Gibson demonstrates that the Jews of this region incorporated Greek manumission practices into their communal life. The execution of private legal contract with the community of Jews as witness in turn suggests that the wider Bosporan community extended respect and recognition to its local Jewish community.