The purpose of this study is to explore the possible continuity between the Jesus movement before Jesus' death and the movement of his disciples after his resurrection in their attitude towards the family. The "anti-familial" sayings of Jesus are studied, together with other gospel traditions which suggest a positive attitude towards family. By placing these sayings in the framework of the mass peasant movement launched by Jesus, we can be more precise about the goals of the disciples within that movement. This research reveals the importance of the Jesus group and of the households that their preaching reached, in explaining the continuity between the pre-and post-Easter periods of the Jesus movement in their attitude towards family. ). He is the author of a monograph on the disruption of the family for the sake of discipleship (FIDELIDADES EN CONFLICTO. LA RUPTURA CON LA FAMILIA POR CAUSA DEL DISCIPULADO Y DE LA MISIÓN EN LA TRADICIÓN SINÓPTICA (Salamanca, 1998). His most recent contribution to BTB is Why Does the Gospel of Mark Begin As It Does?

No abstract

The Q Document includes a significant number of references to characters and events of Israelite history. The purpose of that intense recollection of the past was to construct a new social identity. Social memory studies have made an important contribution to the understanding of this process by which groups construct their identities. In this article some basic conclusions of social memory and social identity studies are applied to the analysis of the Q references to Abraham (Q 3:8; 13:29.28), to the persecuted prophets (Q 6:23; 11:33-34, 47-48, 49-51), and to non-Judean individuals and groups (Q 10:13-14; 11:30-32).

No abstract

Jesus was accused of being possessed by Beelzebul because of the exorcisms he practiced. This kind of view is characteristic of the first-century Mediterranean interpretation of deviant behavior. The purpose of this article is to determine the historical causes of this accusation and the purpose of the reaction of Jesus against it. To accomplish this we apply to the Beelzebul controversy some models developed in the study of deviant behavior. The first step is a source- and tradition-critical study of the sayings contained in it to determine which ot them can be assigned to the historical Jesus. Then the accusation of being possessed by Beelzebul is considered in the framework of societal reactions to deviant behavior. Finally, the responses of Jesus are placed in the scenario of the Mediterranean challenge and riposte game and in the context of other possible reactions to negative labeling.