Narrative theory, especially as it pertains to biblical narrative, is in a nebulous state. This article points out the enduring importance of narrative criticism for biblical narrative by way of a comparison between the two extant versions of the ancient narrative of Bel and the Dragon. By using an eclectic model of narrative theory, three traditional focal points of narratology (time, character and space) are compared. In comparing these aspects of the two versions, certain emphases of each come to light, clearly showing the benefits of reading biblical narrative as narrative.

The mysterious dream of Pilate's wife and its recounting to her husband (Matthew 27:19b) occupies a significant place in discussions on Pilate's guilt. The present article aims to investigate the reception of this text by the early church. Special attention is paid to the early commentators' views on the possible link between the dream of Pilate's wife and Pilate's guilt, as this is an ambiguity in the Matthean text. Another uncertainty in the Matthean text concerns the story's chronology. The early commentators' views on this matter are also examined. Lastly, the varied ways of applying this text in new contexts are investigated.

The episode of Peter’s rescue from prison in Acts 12:5–17 occupies an intriguing position in the narrative of Acts as a whole. Scholars hold differing views on the episode’s function. These views range from seeing the episode as a hermeneutical key to the work as a whole to making no discernable difference to the narrative whatsoever. The present article seeks to contribute to the debate by reading Acts 12:5–17 spatially. In paying attention to the various spatial references in the text, the movement of characters, their locales and their own and the reader’s experience of them being present or not present, a contrasting structure may be perceived in the text. Furthermore, spatiality helps to point out the contrast between different character groups in the narrative. Some implications for reading the episode in this contrasting fashion will be indicated, and the enigmatic statement about Peter’s ‘going to another place’ (Ac 12:17) will be read against the text’s spatial background.

This article investigates the reception of Luke 19:8b in the works of Chrysostom. The ambiguous nature of Luke 19:8b in its Lukan context provides a glimpse into Chrysostom’s thoughts on this passage. In asking the question of how Chrysostom viewed Zacchaeus’s salvation to be effected (cf. the direct speech of Jesus in Luke 19:9−10), the article demonstrates that Chrysostom’s consistent concern, wherever reference to Luke 19:8b is made, is with adequate compensation to people who have been wronged. The article also points out how Chrysostom did not shy away from making slight changes to the biblical narrative to convey this message.

No abstract