Armin D. Baum

Die Bibel ist inspiriert – was heißt das und was nicht? – Ein Interview, in: Bibel und Gemeinde 2/15 (2015) 43-56:

Inspiration ist interessanterweise ein Begriff, der in der Bibel selbst gar nicht so oft vorkommt. Wenn wir nachlesen wollen, wo wir diesen Begriff finden, dann stoßen wir in der lateinischen Fassung (der Vulgata) auf genau zwei Stellen, in 2 Tim 3,16 und in 2 Petr 1,21. In diesen zwei Stellen kommt das entsprechende Wort vor und sonst nicht. Diese Beobachtung könnte einen auf die Idee bringen: Zur Bibelinspiration lässt sich nicht viel sagen. Was das ist, kann man auch gar nicht genau erklären, weil die Bibel selbst ja nichts dazu sagt …

Warum die Bibel das mächtigste Buch der Welt ist, in: Idea Spektrum 42 (2014) 34-35:

„… Normale moderne Bibelleser, an denen man exemplarisch ablesen könnte, warum die Bibel bis in die jüngste Gegenwart eine so gewaltige Wirkung entfaltet, kommen nicht vor. Dabei gibt es weltweit Millionen Menschen, denen aus den Blättern dieses uralten Buches die Frische und Reinheit der ewigen Welt Gottes entgegenraschelt (C. S. Lewis). Darin liegt die einzigartige Macht der biblischen Texte. Und darin, dass sie die Kraft haben, ihre Leser schon auf dieser Seite der Wirklichkeit frischer und reiner zu machen. Diese Überzeugung muss man nicht teilen. Aber warum die Bibel bis heute das mächtigste Buch der Welt ist, kann man nicht erklären, wenn man diese spirituelle Dimension vollständig ausspart“.

Paul’s Conflicting Statements on Female Public Speaking and Silence, in: Tyndale Bulletin 65 (2014) 247-274:

(Abstract) How could in 1 Corinthians women at the same time be permitted to prophecy (1 Cor. 11:5) and prohibited from asking questions (1 Cor. 14:34-35)? Read against their ancient cultural background the two texts reveal a common basic principle which lies behind both of them. According to Paul, female public speaking without male consent was unacceptable (1 Cor. 14:34-35) whereas female public speaking with male consent was tolerable if female chastity was preserved (1 Cor. 11:5).

Review of Bart D. Ehrman, Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics. Oxford: University Press, 2012, in: Novum Testamentum 56 (2014) 428-431:

… Ehrman has rightly joined the growing number of scholars who have raised substantial doubts regarding the (once) popular thesis of innocent ancient pseudepigraphy. At the same time, his assertion that in antiquity a text’s authenticity was assessed not on the basis of its content but always on the basis of its wording goes one step beyond what the numerous relevant sources reveal.

Does the Pericope Adulterae Have Canonical Authority? An Interconfessional Approach, in: Bulletin for Biblical Research 24 (2014) 163-178:

(Abstract) The historicity of the event which the pericope adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) relates has not been disproved. The orthodoxy of the words of Jesus it contains also cannot be denied. If the canonicity of the pericope is determined according to the same historical and content-related criteria which the ancient church applied during the development of the canon of Scriptures nothing speaks against its canonical status. Such an assessment does not rest on an infallible and therefore binding decision of the church or its magisterium or on an internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. When the pericope adulterae is accepted into the New Testament it should not be placed between chapters 7 and 8 of the Gospel of John because it is not part of the original text of this book. Rather, it should be put after John’s Gospel, because it probably comes from the same historical root. Those who hesitate to accept the pericope adulterae as canonical can remove it from the New Testament without having to fear a serious loss. Everything the pericope has to say is also expressed several times in other places of the biblical canon. The additional benefit of the narrative of Jesus and the adulteress is not some singular ethical or theological statement. Its particular value lies in the fact that the pericope presents the forgiveness offered by Jesus to those who are condemned to death by the Mosaic law in a more elaborate, more colorful, and more pointed way than any other passage of the New Testament.