¹ ‘The Transformation of the Synagogue after 70 C.E.: Its Import for Early Christianity’, NTS 36 (1990) 1–24Google Scholar; Kee expressed similar views earlier in his The New Testament in Context. Sources and Documents (Englewood: Prentice-Hall, 1984) 130–3.Google Scholar

² Kee, ‘Transformation’, 18.

³ A. T. Kraabel's attempt (e.g., Kraabel, A. T., ‘The Disappearance of the “God-fearers”’, Numen 28 [1981] 113–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; MacLennan, R. S. and Kraabel, A. T., ‘The God-fearers – a Literary and Theological Invention’, BAR 12.5 [1986] 46–51, 64Google Scholar) to demonstrate that Luke's references to ‘God-fearers’ is an anachronistic fabrication has raised the awareness of New Testament scholars to the complexity of the historical and lexical evidence; his conclusions, however, have been rejected or seriously questioned by most scholars. The list of dissenters includes: Schürer, E., The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) 3.1 (New version ed. by Vermes, G., Millar, F., and Goodman, M.; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986) 168Google Scholar; Kant, L. H., ‘Jewish Inscriptions in Greek and Latin’, ANRW II 20.2, 687Google Scholar; Gager, J. G., ‘Jews, Gentiles, and Synagogues in the Book of Acts’, HTR 79 (1986) 91–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Overman, J. Andrew, ‘The God-fearers: Some Neglected Factors’, JSNT 32 (1988) 17–26Google Scholar; Hemer, Colin, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History (WUNT 49; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1989) 444–7Google Scholar; Bruce, F. F., The Acts of the Apostles. The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary (3rd rev. and enl. ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 253Google Scholar; Cohen, S. J. D., ‘Respect for Judaism by Gentiles According to Josephus’, HTR 80 (1987) 409–30Google Scholar; Collins, J. J., ‘A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century’, ‘To See Ourselves as Others See Us.’ Christians, Jews, ‘Others’ in Late Antiquity (ed. Neusner, J. and Fredrichs, E. S.; Chico: Scholars, 1985) 163–86.Google Scholar

⁴ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 4.

⁵ E.g., Griffiths, J. Gwyn, ‘Egypt and the Rise of the Synagogues’, JTS n.s. 38.1 (1987) 1–15 provides an example of a culturally sensitive approach.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶ Furthermore, a certain latitude is appropriate since no one knows the date, the geographical destination or the provenance of Luke–Acts; cf. Kümmel, W. G., Introduction to the New Testament (17th rev. ed.; Nashville: Abingdon, 1975) 151–88Google Scholar and Guthrie, D., New Testament Introduction (4th rev. ed.; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1990) 351–402.Google Scholar

⁷ The use of the singular form ‘Judaism’ reflects only a stylistic preference and is not meant to assume or impose uniformity on the ancient sources that did not exist. Scholars have written against the facile use of later rabbinic materials to interpret the New Testament. Jewish publications (e.g., numerous works by S. J. D. Cohen and J. Neusner) as well as articles in New Testament journals have repeatedly made this point, e.g., Sandmel, S., ‘Parallelomania’, JBL 81 (1962) 1–13Google Scholar; Alexander, P. S., ‘Rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament’, ZNW 74 (1983) 237–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ Two prominent examples of scholarly works that reflect less scepticism in using the Mishnah are Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Section 1: The Jewish People in the First Century. Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974, 1976)Google Scholar and Schürer, History of the Jewish People.

⁹ Since from Kee's perspective it would be ‘begging the question’ to use New Testament texts written after AD 70 (e.g., Matthew; Luke; Acts; John), I will omit them from this investigation. I am intentionally excluding resources that pertain to Samaritan communities and synagogues during the period of the Second Temple. For evidence of Samaritan synagogues of the Hellenistic and Roman periods see Pieter Horst, W. van der, ‘The Samaritan Diaspora in Antiquity’, Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity (NTOA 14; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990) 136–47Google Scholar; the epigraphical evidence for Samaritans (= ‘Israelites who make offerings at Mt Gerizim’) at Delos is given by Bruneau, Ph., ‘“Les Israelites de Délos” et la juiverie délienne’, BCH 106 (1982) 465–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar and White, L. M., ‘The Delos Synagogue Revisited. Recent Fieldwork in the Graeco-Roman Diaspora’, HTR 80 (1987) 133–60, esp. 141–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰ All works from Josephus will be cited according to the text and enumeration of the Loeb Classical Library.

¹¹ All works from Philo will be cited according to the text and enumeration of the Loeb Classical Library.

¹² Stern, Menahem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (ed. with Introductions, Translations, and Commentary; 3 Vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1976, 1980, 1984).Google Scholar

¹³ Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (= CPJ) Vol. 1 (ed. Tcherikover, V. A. and Fuks, A.; Cambridge: Harvard University, 1957)Google Scholar; Vol. 2 (V. A. Tcherikover [†] and A. Fuks; Cambridge: Harvard University, 1960); Vol. 3 (ed. V. A. Tcherikover [†], A. Fuks and M. Stern, with epigraphic contribution by D. M. Lewis; Cambridge: Harvard University, 1964).

¹⁴ Corpus Inscriptionum ludaicarum Vol. 1: Europe [was reprinted with addenda and corrigenda as Corpus of Jewish Inscriptions. Jewish Inscriptions from the Third Century B.C. to the Seventh Century A.D. Vol. 1: Europe, Prolegomenon by Baruch Lifshitz (= CII ²) (2nd ed.; New York: KTAV, 1975)] and Vol. 2: Asia-Africa (= CII) [was never revised or reprinted] (Rome: Pontifical Institute of Archaeology, 1936, 1952); Lewis, D. M., ‘Appendix 1: The Jewish Inscriptions of Egypt’, CPJ 3:138–66Google Scholar, nn. 1424–1539 follows the enumeration of CII 2, thereby curiously putting the most accessible and most recently revised Jewish inscriptions from Egypt in the collection of Jewish papyri from Egypt; Lifshitz, B., Donateurs et fondateurs dans les synagogues juives (CahRB 7; Paris: J. Gabalda et Cie, 1967)Google Scholar; Kant, , ‘Jewish Inscriptions in Greek and Latin’, ANRW II 20.2, 671–713Google Scholar; Reynolds, J. M., ‘Inscriptions’, Excavations at Sidi Khrebish Benghazi (Berenice) Vol. 1: Buildings, Coins, Inscriptions, Architectural Decoration (Supplements to Libya Antiqua 5; ed. Lloyd, J. A.; Hertford: Stephen Austin and Sons, 1977) 1:233–54Google Scholar; Lüderitz, Gert, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse aus der Cyrenaika mit einem Anhang von Joyce M. Reynolds (Beihefte zum Tübingen Atlas des Vorderen Orients 19; Wiesbaden: Dr Ludwig Reichert, 1983).Google Scholar

¹⁵ For the debate over identification of the Diaspora synagogues see Kraabel, A. T., ‘The Diaspora Synagogue: Archaeological and Epigraphic Evidence since Sukenik’, ANRW 11.19.1:477–510.Google Scholar

¹⁶ White, L. M., ‘Delos Synagogue Revisited’, 133–60Google Scholar is especially helpful; cf. Kraabel, A. T., ‘Diaspora Synagogue’, ANRW II.19.1, 491–4Google Scholar. This same chronological delimitation moves the otherwise significant work of L. M. White outside the purview of this investigation (Domus Ecclesiae – Domus Dei. Adaptation and Development in the Setting for Early Christian Assembly, Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1982).

¹⁷ Yadin, Y., ‘The Synagogue at Masada’, Ancient Synagogues Revealed (ed. Levine, L. I.; Detroit: Wayne State University, 1982) 19–23.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Foerster, G., ‘The Synagogues at Masada and Herodium’, Ancient Synagogues Revealed, 24–9.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Gutman, S., ‘The Synagogue at Gamla’, Ancient Synagogues Revealed, 30–4Google Scholar.

²⁰ Chiat, M. J. S., Handbook of Synagogue Architecture (BJS 29; Chico: Scholars, 1982) 2–3Google Scholar, ‘Neither a building's plan nor its location within a presumed Jewish village can qualify a ruin as a synagogue. Only rarely is it possible to identify a building as a synagogue solely on the basis of its architectural form or location.’ Consult also Meyers, Eric M. and Strange, James F., Archaeology, the Rabbis and Early Christianity (Nashville: Abingdon, 1981) 140–54.Google Scholar

²¹ Consult the works by Silva, M., Biblical Words and Their Meaning. An Introduction to Lexical Semantics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983) and P. Cotterell and M. Turner, Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1989).Google Scholar

²² All Greek New Testament citations follow The Greek New Testament (ed. K. Aland, M. Black, C. M. Martini, B. Metzger and A. Wikgren; 3rd ed., corrected; Stuttgart: 1983).Google Scholar

²³ Cohen, Shaye J. D., From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (Library of Early Christianity 7; ed. Meeks, W. A.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1989) 114.Google Scholar

²⁴ ‘Proseuche und Synagoge: Jüdische Gemeinde, Gotteshaus und Gottesdienst in der Diaspora und in Palästina’, The Synagogue: Studies in Origins, Archaeology and Architecture (Selected with a Prolegomenon by Joseph Gutmann; Library of Biblical Studies; ed. H. M. Orlinsky; New York: KTAV, 1975) 157–84Google Scholar and Schürer, History of the Jewish People 2, 439–47. H. Greeven, ‘εὔχομαι – προσευχή’, TDNT 2.808 is disappointingly void of helpful sources or discussion.

²⁵ Just as a variety of Greek terms were used to describe the physical meeting places of Jews, so also many different terms were used to describe the people themselves. A convenient list, with documentation, is given in Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1, 87–98; Greek terms include oί Ἰουδαîοι, πoλίτευμα, κατοικία, λαός, ἔθνος, σνοδος and συναγωγή.

²⁶ Levine, L. I., ‘The Second Temple Synagogue: The Formative Years’, The Synagogue in Late Antiquity (ed. Levine, L. I.; Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1987) 20–1.Google Scholar

²⁷ Levine, ‘The Second Temple Synagogue: The Formative Years’, 21.

²⁸ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 18.

²⁹ Although he does not treat the specific words συναγωγή and προσευχή, Hemer, Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, 221–43 discusses Lukan variety in word choice and spellings in Acts.

³⁰ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 18–19.

³¹ This chart is a revision of the evidence gathered by many scholars. The following works were especially helpful, though most of them include evidence of synagogues found in sources as late as the sixth century AD (I have deleted these post-70 materials, e.g., references to synagogues as άγίος τόπος): Levine, ‘The Second Temple Synagogue: The Formative Years’, Synagogue in Late Antiquity 13; Cohen, ‘Pagan and Christian Evidence on the Ancient Synagogue’, Synagogue in Late Antiquity, 159–81; Hengel, ‘Proseuche und Synagogue’, 157–84; Kant, , ‘Jewish Inscriptions in Greek and Latin’, ANRW II.20.2, 671–713Google Scholar and Schürer, , History of the Jewish People 2, 439–47.Google Scholar

³² These words are, of course, not synonyms. Rather, they are co-referential terms; cf. Cotterell and Turner, Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation, 160–1.

³³ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, nn. 17–18, esp. p. 247 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, nn. 70–1 and p. 155 and SEG 16 n. 931). Cogent evidence for this interpretation of a North African Jewish inscription dated ca. 8–6 BC is given by Shim'ron Applebaum, Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene (SJLA 28; ed. J. Neusner; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979) 160–7.Google Scholar

³⁴ There is second-century AD epigraphical evidence for a Σαμβαθεîον at Thyatira which some believe is a reference to a Jewish synagogue, CII 2 n. 752; for discussion see Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1, 624.

³⁵ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 6.

³⁶ Although it is not germane to Luke-Acts and the Second Temple period, there does exist an inscription that calls into question the certainty of Kee's statement (6) that ‘from the first century C.E. on to the time of Diocletian, inscriptions from the Bosphorus and the Black Sea area use synagogue for the community and proseuche for the place where they gather’. A Jewish Greek inscription (Lifshitz, Donateurs et fondateurs, n. 35) contemporary with Diocletian from Amastris (Paphlagonia) may provide an example of προσευχή meaning community. This inscription begins with a dedication Θεῷ νεικήτῳ κα τ κυρίᾳ προσευχ, concerning which M. Hengel observed, ‘Neben der Gottheit wird auch ihr Versammlungsort – der hier eventuell gar die Bezeichnung des Kultvereins selbst bedeutet – geehrt’, ‘Proseuche und Synagoge’, 179.

³⁷ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, n. 16 (= Gert Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, n. 72 and SEG 17 n. 823). Lifshitz, Donateurs et fondateurs, n. 100, translates this inscription, ‘La deuxième année du règne de Néon Claudius César Drusus Germanicus Imperator, le 6^e jour de Khoïakh. II a plu à la communauté des Juifs de Béréniké d'inscrire sur une stèle de marbre de Paros les noms de ceux qui avaient contribué à la réparation de la synagogue’, p. 82.

³⁸ Hengel, ‘Proseuche und Synagoge’, observes, ‘Jetzt bedeutet συναγωγή plötzlich sowohl die Gemeinde wie das Synagogengebäude’, 52.

³⁹ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 6.

⁴⁰ Texts were located by means of Rengstorf, K. H., A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus (4 Vols.; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973, 1975, 1979, 1983)Google Scholar. The specific historicity of the accounts cited from Josephus is not relevant to this investigation. The value of Josephus is in regard to the usage of the Greek word συναγωγή by a Jewish author of the first century describing circumstances from the very recent period of the Second Temple.

⁴¹ De bello Judaico (= BJ) 2.285–91.

⁴² BJ 7.43–4.

⁴³ Antiquitates Judaicae (=Antiq. Jud.) 19.299–305.

⁴⁴ Contemporary evidence from Philo (Legatio ad Gaium [= Leg.] 134, 138, 151–2, 346) clearly shows that the imperial images were erected in Jewish buildings (προσευχή) and not in congregations of people assembled in religiously ‘neutral’ locations.

⁴⁵ Antiq. Jud. 19.305–6.

⁴⁶ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 5. Without wishing to appear overly pedantic, Kee's reference to the ‘18 times when he [Philo] uses the term’ proseuche should be increased to nineteen; Mayer, Güinter, Index Philoneus (New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar cited occurrences at the following: In Flaccum 41, 45, 47, 48, 49, 53,122; Leg. 132, 134, 137, 138, 148, 152, 156, 157, 165, 191, 346, 371; all of these refer to synagogues.

⁴⁷ De posteritate Caini (= Post.) 67 (2x); De agricultura (= Agr.) 44 (2x); Quod omnis probus liber sit 81; Güinter Mayer, Index Philoneus, 267.

⁴⁸ Post. 67 (2x); Agr. 44 (2x).

⁴⁹ Num 27.16–17 (Rahlfs) Ἐπισκεψάσθω κύριος θεòς τν πνευμάτων κα πάσης σαρκòς ἄνθρωπου πì τς συναγωγς ταύτης ὅστις έξελεύσεται πρò προσώπου αύτν καì őστις είσελεύσεται πρò προσώπου αύτν καì őστις έξάξει αύτος καì őστις εἰσξει αύτος καì őστις oύκ ἔσται ή συναγωγ κυρίου ώσεì πρόβατα, oἷς oύκ ἔστιν ποιμήν; the strength of this textual witness is seen in the fact that no textual variants at these occurrences of συναγωγή are cited ad loc. in the following editions: Rahlfs, A., Septuaginta (Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1965) Vol. 1;Google ScholarBrooke, A. E. and McLean, N., The Old Testament in Greek. Numbers and Deuteronomy (London: Cambridge University, 1911) Vol. 1, pt. 3Google Scholar; Weavers, J. W., Text History of the Greek Numbers (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-hist. Kl. 3rd ser. 125; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ In a lengthy acknowledgement of his debt to Neusner, Kee writes, ‘For our purposes, the major implication of the positive results of Neusner's work is to see that his reconstruction of first-century Pharisaism as a lay movement, based primarily in homes, concentrating on personal purity and experiencing table-fellowship as the high point of the group's existence matches superbly with the literary and archaeological evidence we have thus far surveyed’, ‘Transformation’, 13.

⁵¹ White, ‘Delos Synagogue Revisited’, 152–5.

⁵² For a discussion of the various positions regarding the Delos synagogue cf. Kraabel, , ‘Diaspora Synagogue: Archaeological and Epigraphic Evidence since Sukenik’, ANRW 11.19.1, 491–4 and White, ‘Delos Synagogue Revisited’, 136–40.Google Scholar

⁵³ White, ‘Delos Synagogue Revisited’, 151.

⁵⁴ See above nn. 15–16.

⁵⁵ Josephus Vita 277 contains the phrase συνάγονται πάντες τν προσευχήν, μέγιστον oἴκημα; neither Josephus' general use of oἴκημα nor this context require that he means a ‘private dwelling’ in this story. B. Lifshitz, Donateurs et fondateurs, for example, lists no uncontested pre-70 examples of this. The well-known synagogue inscription from Acmonia (Phrygia) (= Lifshitz, Donateurs et fondateurs, n. 33; White, Domus Ecclesiae – Domus Dei, 270–2) is not at all conclusive in this regard. One does know with some certainty that the structure was originally built (τòν κατασκευσαθέντα oἶκον) by Julia Severa during the last half of the first century AD. We do not know, however, when it was later renovated (πεκεύασαν) by the Jews. Moreover, it may be that the oἶκος was renovated by the Jews for the very reason that a domestic setting (if that is what oἶκος implies) was not acceptable to them as a meeting place. Later occurrences (post-70) of oἶκος in synagogue inscriptions need not refer to a domestic setting in someone's private home; cf. White, Domus Ecclesiae – Domus Dei, 270–2, 283–4 for epigraphical examples and scholarly debate over the contextual meaning of oἶκος.

⁵⁶ Cf. above nn. 17–19.

⁵⁷ I wish to express here my appreciation to Mr. Kenneth Atkinson, a graduate student at Harding University Graduate School of Religion, for his insights about Gamala, a site where he has excavated for two seasons.

⁵⁸ Kee, ‘Transformation’, 8.

⁵⁹ Meyers and Strange, Archaeology, 140–3 and Joseph Gutmann, ‘The Origins of the Synagogue: The Current State of Research’, The Synagogue: Studies in Origins, Archaeology and Structure, 72–6.

⁶⁰ Kee's ‘quotation’ (8) of this one sentence from Meyers and Strange, Archaeology, 141 inadvertently contains nine errors. It seems apposite to cite their comments given on the prior page in Archaeology. They write (140), ‘Although previous generations of scholars assumed the existence of distinct physical structures in this period [first centuries C.E.], documentation for them was virtually nonexistent. To be sure, literary as well as epigraphic support for supposing such a reality was always great, and only the excavations which produced the first-century-C.E. prayer houses at Masada, Herodium Magdala (Tarichaeae), and Gamala have necessitated a reevaluation of the question of how and where Jews prayed during this formative period.’

⁶¹ L. I. Levine, ‘The Second Temple Synagogue: The Formative Years’, Synagogue in Late Antiquity, 11.

⁶² Gutman(n), S., ‘Gamla-1983’, Excavations and Surveys in Israel 1984 3 (1984) 26–7Google Scholar; general site plans in Gutman, S., Gamla. The First Eight Seasons of Excavations (Israel: Hakibbutz Hameuchad, 1981; in Hebrew) indicate an approximate size of 3 × 13 metres.Google Scholar

⁶³ The ancient literary references to Gamala are collected by Avi-Yonah, M., Gazetteer of Roman Palestine (Qedem. Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 5; Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1976) 58Google Scholar; however, at the time of the Gazetteer's publication, the site of Gamala was not yet correctly identified. Gamala became a stronghold of Jewish zeal and practice following its capture by Alexander Jannaeus (first century BC) and remained so until its destruction by Vespasian in AD 68.

⁶⁴ Z. Ma'oz, ‘The Synagogue of Gamla and the Typology of Second-Temple Synagogues’, Ancient Synagogues Revealed, 39 notes, ‘The surviving fragments of the lintel of the main entrance show that it was decorated in the center with a six-petalled rosette and flanked by date palms. … The rosette is a common motif in Jewish art of the Second Temple period. … The date palm is less prevalent in Jewish art, though it occurs on Hasmonaean and Herodian coins, as well as on the Judaea Capta coin series struck by the Romans to commemorate their victory over Judaea. This motif apparently symbolized Judaea and the Jewish people in general.’ A photograph of this lintel is given in S. Gutman, Gamla. The First Eight Seasons, unnumbered photographic plates placed between p. 96 and p. 97 and in Gutman, ‘The Synagogue at Gamla’, Ancient Synagogues Revealed, 34.

⁶⁵ Chiat, Handbook of Synagogue Architecture, 283 lists the measurement of the main hall of the Gamala synagogue as 20 × 16 meters.

⁶⁶ Ma'oz, ‘The Synagogue of Gamla and the Typology of Second-Temple Synagogues’, Ancient Synagogues Revealed, 41.

⁶⁷ Applebaum, S., ‘The Organization of the Jewish Communities in the Diaspora’, The Jewish People in the First Century 1, 464–503;Google Scholar Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1, 87–149.

⁶⁸ Hengel, M., Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1:244.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Corpus Inscriptionum Regni Bosporani (= CIRB) (Leningrad: Academia Scientiarum URSS, 1965) nn. 70, 71, 73, 985(?), 1123, 1127, 1128(?).

⁷⁰ A. T. Kraabel, ‘Unity and Diversity among Diaspora Synagogues’, Synagogue in Late Antiquity, 58.

⁷¹ Westermann, William L., The Slave Systems of Greek and Roman Antiquity (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society 40; Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1955) 125Google Scholar; cf. Bömer, F., Untersuchungen über die Religion der Sklauen in Griechenland und Rom Zweiter Teil: Die sogenannte sakrale Freilassung in Griechenland und die (δολοι) ίεροί (Akademie der Wissenschaft und der Literatur; Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1960) 101–6.Google Scholar

⁷² Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1, 105–6 and Westermann, Slave Systems, 124–6; cf. Krauss, S., ‘Sklavenbefreiung in den jüdisch-griechischen Inschriften aus Südrussland’, Festschrift zu Ehren des Dr. A. Harkavy (ed. Günzburg, D. v. and Markon, I., 1908; repr. New York: Arno, 1980) 52–67.Google Scholar

⁷³ CIRB n. 1123 (= CII ² n. 690).

⁷⁴ CIRB n. 70 (= CII ² n. 683); the notes and occasional English translations in CII ² ‘Prolegomenon’, 64–9 are helpful.

⁷⁵ Bömer, Untersuchungen über die Religion der Sklauen, 103. For the nature and practice of παραμονή in the legal and social history of manumission see Waldstein, W., Operae Libertorum. Untersuchungen zur Dienstpflicht freigelassener Sklaven (Forschungen zur antiken Sklaverei 19; Stuttgart: Franz Steiner) 92–109Google Scholar; Westermann, Slave Systems, 25–6, 33–4, 55–7; Hopkins, Keith, Conquerors and Slaves (Sociological Studies in Roman History 1; London: Cambridge University, 1978) 133–58Google Scholar and Wiedemann, Th., Greek and Roman Slavery (London: Johns Hopkins University, 1981) nn. 23–7, 42–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hopkins, Conquerors and Slaves, 140, interprets this term as ‘conditional release’ and notes that approximately 50% of the manumission inscriptions in first-century AD Delphi were characterized by παραμονή.

⁷⁶ This may in fact refer to some type of congregational supervision of a position of service within the life of the community as it was manifested at the synagogue, e.g., duties performed by a νεωκόρος.

⁷⁷ Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1, 105 fn. 66; in the text of the same page this phrase is rendered ‘respect toward the synagogue and regular attendance’. Similar Greek phrases (χωρìς το προσκαρτερεîν τῇ προσευχῇ) are found in related inscriptions, for example CIRB nn. 71 [= CII ² ‘Prolegomenon’, p. 65, treated generally by H. Bellen, ‘Συυαγωγ τυ Ἰουδαων κα Θεοσεβν. Die Aussage einer bosporanischen Freilassungsinschrift (CIRB 71) zum Problem der “Gottfürchtigen”’, JAC 8–9 (1965–1966) 171–6], 73, 985.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ In general see the ancient Greek and Latin texts collected and annotated by Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews 1, 196–201 (Cicero Flac. 28, 66–9), 2:39 (Tacitus Hist. 5.5.1) and discussion in 2, 129; Josephus documents this practice during the period of the Second Temple (e.g. Josephus BJ 7.218; Antiq. Jud. 14.110–13; 16.160, 166; 18.312).

⁷⁹ De specialibus legibus (= Spec.Leg.) 1.77.

⁸⁰ Leg. 311.

⁸¹ Spec. Leg. 1.78; cf. Leg. 312. Additional appointees would be necessary, it seems to me, to supervise the funds before transport; note Philo's description (Spec. Leg. 1.78), ‘In fact, practically in every city there are banking places for the holy money where people regularly come and give their offerings. And at stated times there are appointed to carry the sacred tribute envoys selected on their merits, from every city those of the highest repute, under whose conduct the hopes of each and all will travel safely.’

⁸² Josephus Antiq. Jud. 14.214, 215; cf. also CPJ n. 139 which dates from the first century BC.

⁸³ Josephus Antiq. Jud. 16.164; Josephus cites this from an Augustan rescript. A similar use of the Greek word νδρών for a dining hall used for meals of a collegium is attested from nearby Rhodes, where the association of Σαβαζιασταί dined in its νδρών (ca. 100 BC, SEG 33 [1983] n. 639.16)Google Scholar.

⁸⁴ Horsley, G. H. R., New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity 1: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri Published in 1976 (North Ryde, NSW: Ancient History Documentary Research Centre, 1981) 9Google Scholar; cf. Horsley, G. H. R., New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity 2: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri Published in 1977 (North Ryde, NSW: Ancient History Documentary Research Centre, 1982) 75.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Contra Apionem (= C.Ap.) 2.175; since the Pauline letters were written during the period of the Second Temple, it is appropriate to note the connection Furnish, V. P. [II Corinthians (Anchor Bible 32A; Garden City: Doubleday, 1984) 233]Google Scholar sees between 2 Cor 3.14–15 (λλ πωρώθη τ νοήματα αύτν. ἄχρι γρ τς σήμερον ήμέρας τò αύτò κάλυμμα πì τῇ ναγνώσει τς παλαις διαθήκης μένει μ νακαλυπτόμενον őτι ν Χριστῷ καταργεîται. λλ' ἕως σήμερον ήνίκα ἂν άναγινώσκηται Mωϋσς, κάλυμμα π τν καρδαν αύτν κεîται) and synagogue activities.

⁸⁶ De somniis 2.123–7.

⁸⁷ BJ 2.291 (τοὺς νόμους) and Antiq. Jud. 16.164 (τς ίερς βίβλους αύτν).

⁸⁸ Spec. Leg. 2.62.

⁸⁹ Text given in Horsley, New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity 1, 28–9.

⁹⁰ CPJ n. 138.

⁹¹ CPJ n. 129.

⁹² E.g., Josephus BJ 1.153; Philo De fuga et inventione 90, 93, 94; De vita Mosis (= Vita M.) 1.316, 318 (2x); Vita M. 2.72; Spec. Leg. 1.156 (2x); Spec. Leg. 2.120; De praemiis et poenis 74.

⁹³ Spec. Leg. 1.156.

⁹⁴ For Berenice see Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, n. 16 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, n. 72); for evidence from the papyri see CPJ nn. 120,121,139; CPJ 3 n. 1514; on the use of the term ‘priest’ for religious functionaries who do not necessarily offer sacrifices see Goodenough, E. R., ‘The Bosporus Inscriptions to the Most High God’, JQR 47 (1957) 226–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹⁵ Introduction to the New Testament. History, Culture and Religion of the Hellenistic Age (2 vols.; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1982) 1.225.Google Scholar Interestingly, the term Rabbi, often understood as an authoritative figure in ancient Judaism, is not well attested in inscriptions or papyri in the period of the Second Temple; cf. Cohen, ‘Epigraphical Rabbis’, 10 who notes that, ‘Of the fifty epigraphical rabbis of Israel, … three apparently [emphasis mine] lived before 100–400 C.E.’

⁹⁶ stated, F. Poland, ‘In allgemeiner Weise wird endlich das Haupt eines Vereins durch den Titel Archisynagogos bezeichnet’, Geschichte des griechischen Vereinswesens (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1909) 355Google Scholar. Pre-Christian examples of this are seen in two Egyptian inscriptions from Alexandria which contain references to an ρχισυνάγωγος Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Ägypten 1 (1915) n. 5959 AD 3 ρχισυνάγω[γ] and 5.3 (1950) n. 8787 AD 3–4 ρχισυναγώ[γων]. An extensive list and discussion of Jewish and non-Jewish examples is given by Horsley, G. H. R., New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity 4: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri Published in 1979 (North Ryde, NSW: Ancient History Documentary Research Centre, 1987) 213–20.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1,100; cf. esp. 2, 434–7.

⁹⁸ CPJ 3 n. 1441 oί πò Ξενεφύρεος Ἰουδαîοι τòν πυλνα τς προσευχς προστάντων Θεοδώρου καì Άχιλλίωνος; additional reference is perhaps located in CPJ 3 n. 1447; Horsley, New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity 4, 241–4 for discussion of προστάτης.

⁹⁹ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, n. 18 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, n. 70.1–5).

¹⁰⁰ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, n. 17 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, n. 71.2–8).

¹⁰¹ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, n. 16 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, n. 72.7–16).

¹⁰² Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 193.

¹⁰³ Gal 4.10 ήμέρας παρατηρεîσθε καì μνας καì καιροὺς καì νιαυτούς; Col 2.16 Μ oὖν τις ύμς κρινέτω … ν μέρει ορτς ἤ νεομηνίας ἤ σαββάτων; Rom 14.5–6 ς μν [γάρ] κρίνει ήμέραν παρ' ήμέραν, őς δ κρίνει πσαν ήμέραν … ό φρονν τν ήμέραν κυρίῳ φρονεî.

¹⁰⁴ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, nn. 17 and 18 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, nn. 70 and 71); the Roman poet Horace (65–8 BC) mentions a brief dialogue with a friend who alludes to the Jewish reverence for hodie tricesima, sabbata (Sat. 1.9.69). The Latin sabbata is straightforward enough in meaning. Most scholars understand tricesima (the thirtieth) to be ‘the celebration of the new moon by the Jews’, so Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews 1,326.

¹⁰⁵ Reynolds, ‘Inscriptions’, n. 17 (= Lüderitz, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse, n. 71.) Plutarch's description (Quaestiones Convivales 671D-672B) of the Jewish Feast of the Tabernacles is based upon the widespread pagan notion (e.g., Tacitus Hist. 5.5.5) of Jewish assimilation of the Dionysus cult; Plutarch's portrayal of this feast assumes its celebration in Jerusalem since he mentions the temple and the High Priest.

¹⁰⁶ CII ² n 725a–b. An important discussion and interpretation is given by Deissmann, A., Light From the Ancient East (4th ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978) Appendix I, 413–24.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ BJ 2.456.

¹⁰⁸ C. Ap. 2.175.

¹⁰⁹ Josephus C. Ap. 2.282; Philo Vita M. 2.21.

¹¹⁰ Ovid Rem. 219–20; Ars 1.76, 415–16; Tibullus 1.3, 18; cf. Juvenal (14.96, 105) who writes after the period of the Second Temple, but seemingly depicts long-established conditions. A Greek inscription of Cilicia from the Augustan period mentions a religious community whose cultic orientation has been debated (OGIS n. 573). The most salient aspect of this inscription is the wording ό θεòς Σαββατιστής, which has engendered discussion (e.g., Sokolowski, F., Lois sacrées de L'Asie Mineure [Travaux et mémoires des anciens membres Etrangers de l'école et de divers savants 9; Paris: E. de Boccard, 1955] n. 80, pp. 181–2Google Scholar and Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1, 625, fn. 183) whether or not this is an example of Jewish influence on a pagan religious association, perhaps analogous to the Jewish influence which is evident in the Greek Magical Papyri (Betz, H. D., The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, including the Demotic Spells [Chicago: University of Chicago, 1986]Google Scholar) or the pagan esteem for Moses in matters of thaumaturgy (Gager, J. G., Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism [SBL 16; Nashville: Abingdon, 1972]Google Scholar). In any case this wording bespeaks the sabbath as an important element in the cult's theology, as does the use of the term oί Σα ββατισταί for the members.

¹¹¹ De opificio mundi 128; cf. Spec. Leg. 2.56–7; in general see Staehle, K., Die Zahlenmystik bei Philon von Alexandreia (Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 1931).Google Scholar

¹¹² Schürer, History of the Jewish People 3.1,141.

¹¹³ Antiq. Jud. 14.242, 245–6, 257–8, 260–1, 263–4.

¹¹⁴ C. Ap. 1.42.

¹¹⁵ Vita M. 2.216.

¹¹⁶ C. Ap. 2.175. In Antiq. Jud. 16.43 Josephus writes, ‘Nor do we make a secret of the precepts that we use as guides in religion and in human relations; we give every seventh day over to the study of our customs and law (τήν τε βδόμην τν ήμερν νίεμεν τῇ μαθήσει τν ήμετέρων θν καì νόμου).’