Boletín de Filología Neotestamentaria 191 116. MORESCHINI, C. - G. MENESTRINA (eds.), Lingua e teologia nel cristia- nesimo greco. Atti del convegno tenuto a Trento l’11-12 dicembre 1997 (Religione e cultura 11). Brescia (Morcelliana) 1999, 310 pp. 117. PETERSEN, W.L. et alii (eds.), Sayings of Jesus: Canonical and non Canonical. Essays in honour of T. Baarda (Supp. to Novum Testamentum 89). Leiden (Brill) 1997, XXVI + 344 pp. In this collection of essays there are some pertaining to NT philology: J.K. Elliott on ‘Mark and the Teaching of Jesus: An Examination of Λόγος and Εὐαγγέλιον’ (the a. concludes by suggesting that Mark has ‘Christianised’ the traditional meaning of these terms’); E.J. Epp, “The NT Papyri at Oxyrrhynchus in Their Social and Intellectual Context” (after a brief survey of the NT Papyri at Oxy., the a. argues that the NT texts do not exhibit any strongly textual marking); W. Schenk deals with “Die rhetorische Funk- tion des Fastenwarnung Mk 2,20” in the light of a grammatical analysis and a literary analysis in comparison with the chreiai. 118. RIUS CAMPS, J., “El ciego de Betsaida/Betania Mc 8,22-26”, EstBíb 58 (2000) 289-308. In the present art. the episode of the first blind man from Mk 8:22-26 is analyzed from different points of view: textual criticism of the numerous variant readings, Alexandrian or Western, structure of the pericope, semantic field of ‘vision’, binary expressions and sequences, and marks for the theological interpretation. 119. SCHOLTISSEK, K., “‘Ihr seid ein Brief Christi’ (2 Kor 3,3)”, BZ 44 (2000) 183-205. This art. situates the epistolary and argumenta- tive context of 2 Cor 3:1-3 in the following structure of the epistle: A (1:1-11); B (1:12-7:16: with ten subdivisions); C (8:1-9:15); D (10:1-13:10); E (13:11-13); then it makes a philological and rhetorical analysis of the text and examines the epistolographic ‘realia’ which are the basis of the letter metaphor. 120. SMIT, J.F.M., “‘You shall not muzzle a threshing ox’. Paul’s use of the law of Moses in 1 Cor 9,8-12”, EstBíb 58 (2000) 239-263. This art. first offers a grammatical, semantic and pragmatic analysis of this text. It essays to demonstrate that the ὅτι-clause in v. 10 should be understood as a further explanation of Dt 25:4 in the preceding verse. It concludes that Paul uses Dt 25:4 as an argu- ment of authority to strengthen his thesis that a gospel preacher have a right to be supported by the community. 121. STARR, J.M., Sharers in Divine Nature. 2 Peter 1:4 in Its Hellen- istic Context (Coniectanea Biblica, NT Series 33). Stockholm (Almqvist) 2000, XIII + 301 pp. The a. first deals with the meth-