Books by Max Botner
Eerdmans, 2026
DESCRIPTION A lively introduction to biblical studies that emphasizes reader engagement How Then ... more DESCRIPTION A lively introduction to biblical studies that emphasizes reader engagement How Then Shall We Read? equips students with the interpretive tools they need to engage the Bible faithfully. This innovative textbook bridges the gap between two traditionally separate fields: New Testament introduction and biblical hermeneutics. It invites students to reflect critically on how their own traditions, experiences, and theological commitments shape their encounter with the biblical text, while underscoring the value of both scholarly analysis and personal spiritual growth. In doing so, it addresses a common challenge in biblical studies courses: helping students see connections between rigorous academic work and meaningful personal engagement with Scripture. The book begins by exploring why interpretation matters, both practically and theologically, before guiding readers through key aspects of biblical interpretation. Students are introduced to the historical process by which the Bible came to be, the importance of historical-critical methods, and the New Testament's cultural and literary contexts. The book's distinctives include a fresh, reader-friendly approach to questions of genre and language, as well as a model for embracing the unity and diversity of the canon. The book also incorporates insights from across Christian traditions and global contexts, inviting students into a rich, ongoing conversation about what it means to read the Bible today. Written specifically for the newest generation of undergraduate students, How Then Shall We Read? provides an up-to-date and accessible entryway into academic biblical interpretation-one that is grounded in the conviction that the ultimate aim of studying Scripture is to grow in the knowledge and love of God.
Baker Academic, 2023
New Testament Greek students have already laid the groundwork to read other ancient Greek texts. ... more New Testament Greek students have already laid the groundwork to read other ancient Greek texts. In this book, an expert in Greek teaches them to read beyond the New Testament, showing both how to do it and why it matters.
This helpful Greek language resource equips students to read and enjoy the vast corpus of ancient Greek literature. It covers a variety of relevant texts from Homer to Ignatius, including the Septuagint and the Apostolic Fathers, making it a perfect supplemental text for courses on Greek or New Testament backgrounds. The book also considers the specific challenges students face when they seek to read more complex Hellenistic and classical texts. Each reading includes a brief introduction to the text, a review of key points of grammar, extensive vocabulary lists, and grammatical explanations that are keyed to three major Greek grammars. The book includes endnotes and suggested readings as well.
Students will acquire a greater capacity to read larger portions of Greek text and confidence that no text or author is beyond their reach.
This helpful Greek language resource equips students to read and enjoy the vast corpus of ancient Greek literature. It covers a variety of relevant texts from Homer to Ignatius, including the Septuagint and the Apostolic Fathers, making it a perfect supplemental text for courses on Greek or New Testament backgrounds. The book also considers the specific challenges students face when they seek to read more complex Hellenistic and classical texts. Each reading includes a brief introduction to the text, a review of key points of grammar, extensive vocabulary lists, and grammatical explanations that are keyed to three major Greek grammars. The book includes endnotes and suggested readings as well.
Students will acquire a greater capacity to read larger portions of Greek text and confidence that no text or author is beyond their reach.
This study contributes to the debate over the function of Davidic sonship in the Gospel of Mark. ... more This study contributes to the debate over the function of Davidic sonship in the Gospel of Mark. In contrast to William Wrede’s paradigm, Botner argues that Mark’s position on Jesus’s ancestry cannot be assessed properly though isolated study of the name David (or the patronym son of David). Rather, the totality of Markan messiah language is relevant to the question at hand. Justification for this paradigm shift is rooted in observations about the ways in which ancient authors spoke of their messiahs. Botner shows that Mark was participant to a linguistic community whose members shared multiple conventions for stylizing their messiahs, Davidic or otherwise. He then traces how the evangelist narratively constructed his portrait of Christ via creative use of the Jewish scriptures. When the Davidssohnfrage is approached from within this sociolinguistic framework, it becomes clear that Mark’s Christ is indeed David’s son.
Eerdmans, 2020
DESCRIPTION
What is the historical basis for today’s atonement theology? Where did it come from, ... more DESCRIPTION
What is the historical basis for today’s atonement theology? Where did it come from, and how has it evolved throughout time? In Atonement, a sterling collection of renowned biblical scholars investigates the early manifestations of this core concept in numerous ancient Jewish and Christian sources. Rather than imposing a particular view of atonement upon these texts, these specialists let the texts speak for themselves, so that the reader can truly understand atonement as it was variously conceived in the Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Pseudepigrapha, the New Testament, and early Christian literature. The resulting diverse ideas mirror the manifold perspectives on atonement today.
Contributors to this volume—Christian A. Eberhart, Crispin Fletcher-Louis, Martha Himmelfarb, T. J. Lang, Carol A. Newsom, Deborah W. Rooke, Catrin Williams, David P. Wright, and N. T. Wright—attend to the linguistic elements at work in these ancient writings without limiting their scope to explicit mentions of atonement. Instead, they explore atonement as a broader phenomenon that negotiates a constellation of features—sin, sacrifice, and salvation—to capture a more accurate and holistic picture. Atonement will serve as an indispensable resource for all future dialogue on these topics within Jewish and Christian circles.
What is the historical basis for today’s atonement theology? Where did it come from, and how has it evolved throughout time? In Atonement, a sterling collection of renowned biblical scholars investigates the early manifestations of this core concept in numerous ancient Jewish and Christian sources. Rather than imposing a particular view of atonement upon these texts, these specialists let the texts speak for themselves, so that the reader can truly understand atonement as it was variously conceived in the Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Pseudepigrapha, the New Testament, and early Christian literature. The resulting diverse ideas mirror the manifold perspectives on atonement today.
Contributors to this volume—Christian A. Eberhart, Crispin Fletcher-Louis, Martha Himmelfarb, T. J. Lang, Carol A. Newsom, Deborah W. Rooke, Catrin Williams, David P. Wright, and N. T. Wright—attend to the linguistic elements at work in these ancient writings without limiting their scope to explicit mentions of atonement. Instead, they explore atonement as a broader phenomenon that negotiates a constellation of features—sin, sacrifice, and salvation—to capture a more accurate and holistic picture. Atonement will serve as an indispensable resource for all future dialogue on these topics within Jewish and Christian circles.
Journal Articles by Max Botner
Oxford Research Encyclopedias, 2025
Email me for the full article.
Summary
Atonement is often understood in terms of theological ... more Email me for the full article.
Summary
Atonement is often understood in terms of theological models that explain how human beings are reconciled to God. Importing such theories into biblical texts, however, can lead to serious distortions. For example, the vast majority of occurrences of the word “atonement” in English Bibles are found in the priestly source of the Pentateuch, where it translates the Hebrew verb kippēr (remove by wiping away). In this context, kippēr does not refer to the endpoint of reconciliation (at-one-ment) nor to the appeasement of divine wrath but to the ritual act of cleansing Yahweh’s sanctuary from the pollution caused by sin and ritual impurity.
Other biblical writers employed kippēr more broadly, applying it to realities such as divine anger, land defilement, impending disaster, and grave sin. In these contexts, the notion that Yahweh can kippēr wanton transgressions presupposes an act of divine clemency that transcends the cultic mechanisms of reconciliation. Ultimately, the prophetic hope is that Yahweh will use the exile to remove the enduring consequences of Israel’s sins.
When rendering kippēr into Greek, the translators of the LXX Pentateuch preferred the verb exhilaskomai. Although they understood that kippēr could carry the sense “to purify,” they selected a term more commonly associated with “propitiation” of a deity. Subsequent translators had to decide whether to follow this precedent or to render kippēr in ways that more closely reflected its contextual meaning. Broadly speaking, they remained consistent in using kippēr in sacrificial contexts with exhilaskomai, while employing a range of terms, including exhilaskomai, in nonsacrificial contexts.
Early Jewish and Christian traditions expanded the concept of atonement well beyond the priestly source. Practices such as penitential prayer, fasting, and almsgiving came to be seen as means of attaining moral purification and release from sin-debt. Certain traditions attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament envision eschatological atonement at the end of exile and anticipate a future restoration following a period of “affliction.” Some also depict heavenly priests performing atonement in a celestial temple, including on a final, cosmic Day of Atonement. Additionally, the motif of vicarious suffering—rooted in the metaphor of the exile as “payment” for Israel’s sins—plays a central role in early Christian atonement theology, wherein Jesus’s death functions as a lutron (ransom payment) for the sins of the people.
Atonement thus emerges as a dynamic and evolving concept, continually reinterpreted through engagement with both biblical and postbiblical traditions. In Judaism, it remains deeply connected to priestly rituals and rabbinic interpretation; in Christianity, it is most commonly expressed through traditional models (e.g., Christus Victor, satisfaction, and moral exemplar) that seek to articulate the redemptive significance of Jesus’s death and resurrection.
Summary
Atonement is often understood in terms of theological models that explain how human beings are reconciled to God. Importing such theories into biblical texts, however, can lead to serious distortions. For example, the vast majority of occurrences of the word “atonement” in English Bibles are found in the priestly source of the Pentateuch, where it translates the Hebrew verb kippēr (remove by wiping away). In this context, kippēr does not refer to the endpoint of reconciliation (at-one-ment) nor to the appeasement of divine wrath but to the ritual act of cleansing Yahweh’s sanctuary from the pollution caused by sin and ritual impurity.
Other biblical writers employed kippēr more broadly, applying it to realities such as divine anger, land defilement, impending disaster, and grave sin. In these contexts, the notion that Yahweh can kippēr wanton transgressions presupposes an act of divine clemency that transcends the cultic mechanisms of reconciliation. Ultimately, the prophetic hope is that Yahweh will use the exile to remove the enduring consequences of Israel’s sins.
When rendering kippēr into Greek, the translators of the LXX Pentateuch preferred the verb exhilaskomai. Although they understood that kippēr could carry the sense “to purify,” they selected a term more commonly associated with “propitiation” of a deity. Subsequent translators had to decide whether to follow this precedent or to render kippēr in ways that more closely reflected its contextual meaning. Broadly speaking, they remained consistent in using kippēr in sacrificial contexts with exhilaskomai, while employing a range of terms, including exhilaskomai, in nonsacrificial contexts.
Early Jewish and Christian traditions expanded the concept of atonement well beyond the priestly source. Practices such as penitential prayer, fasting, and almsgiving came to be seen as means of attaining moral purification and release from sin-debt. Certain traditions attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament envision eschatological atonement at the end of exile and anticipate a future restoration following a period of “affliction.” Some also depict heavenly priests performing atonement in a celestial temple, including on a final, cosmic Day of Atonement. Additionally, the motif of vicarious suffering—rooted in the metaphor of the exile as “payment” for Israel’s sins—plays a central role in early Christian atonement theology, wherein Jesus’s death functions as a lutron (ransom payment) for the sins of the people.
Atonement thus emerges as a dynamic and evolving concept, continually reinterpreted through engagement with both biblical and postbiblical traditions. In Judaism, it remains deeply connected to priestly rituals and rabbinic interpretation; in Christianity, it is most commonly expressed through traditional models (e.g., Christus Victor, satisfaction, and moral exemplar) that seek to articulate the redemptive significance of Jesus’s death and resurrection.
The Journal of Theological Studies, 2025
Markan interpreters agree that the fulcrum of the first controversy series (Mark 2:1–3:6) is a lo... more Markan interpreters agree that the fulcrum of the first controversy series (Mark 2:1–3:6) is a logion that underscores Jesus’ absence from the community he founded: ‘The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day’ (2:20). Some conclude that the logion is a post hoc attempt to justify ‘Christian’ fasting practices (e.g. Didache 8:1), while others maintain that it alludes to the nature of the post-crucifixion period. This article (re)introduces into this discussion one of the earliest interpretations of Mark 2:20: Origen’s interpretation of the ‘day’ of the bridegroom’s absence as the eschatological Day of Atonement (Hom. Lev. 9). Second, it explores the extent to which a Yom Kippur typology illuminates Mark’s portrayal of the interstice between the death and resurrection of Jesus, on the one hand, and the parousia of the Son of Man, on the other. My suggestion is that the Markan logion enfolds the disciples into an apocalyptic season of Yom Kippur ‘affliction’ and anticipation.
Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, 2018
Despite burgeoning interest in Pseudo-Philo's use of the Jewish scriptures, little to-date ha... more Despite burgeoning interest in Pseudo-Philo's use of the Jewish scriptures, little to-date has been said about the writer's psalm of David ( LAB 59.4). In fact, outside of Strugnell's reconstruction of the psalm's Vorlage (1965) and Jacobson's two-volume commentary (1996), virtually nothing has been written about this section of Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum. This article demonstrates that LAB 59.4 constitutes a sophisticated piece of scriptural exegesis that fits within the writer's well-established hermeneutical strategies. It identifies plausible intertexts comprising LAB's psalm and traces the hermeneutical techniques that attracted Pseudo-Philo to these passages of scripture.
Journal of Biblical Literature
This article interrogates the standard interpretation of οἶκος πνευματικός (“spiritual house”), i... more This article interrogates the standard interpretation of οἶκος πνευματικός (“spiritual house”), in 1 Pet 2:5, as an ecclesial replacement of the Jerusalem temple. The first half scrutinizes the ways in which this metaphor has prejudiced New Testament scholars to misconstrue community-as-temple metaphors in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The second half takes these sectarian metaphors as a point of departure in order to reconsider the seemingly self-evident interpretation of the Petrine οἶκος πνευματικός. Comparison is made between Petrine and Pauline temple metaphors, which calls into question the conventional wisdom that Christian temple discourse post-70 CE is inherently supersessionist. Once this Petrine metaphor is liberated from its metaphysical captivity to Christian theology, it becomes clear that the sacrificial logic of 1 Pet 2:5 militates against equating the addressees with the “true” eschatological temple. While valid questions about the rhetoric of 1 Peter remain, it seems unlikely that the metaphor οἶκος πνευματικός funds a supersessionist ideology.
Biblical Research, 2019
This article advances the claim that the sacrificial logic of Eph 5:2 relies primarily on the lif... more This article advances the claim that the sacrificial logic of Eph 5:2 relies primarily on the life of Jesus Christ. In contrast to Pauline interpreters, who tend to construe ritual slaughter as the goal of sacrifice, I treat sacrifice as a hierarchical process that centers on blood manipulation and ritual burning. The comparison the writer charts between the Christ-gift and the “fragrant aroma” of sacrifice (ὀσμή εὐωδίας), I suggest, evokes the presentation and perpetual presence of Christ’s resurrection life before God in heaven (cf. Eph 1:20–21; 2:6; 4:10). The element of the sacrificial complex that indexes God’s receipt of the gift thus offered a heuristic metaphor to articulate the significance of Christ’s enthronement in the heavenly realms—the centerpiece of the writer’s Christology and soteriology.
Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 2019
This article reappraises the underlying logic of Jesus’ trial in Mark 14.53–65. I propose that th... more This article reappraises the underlying logic of Jesus’ trial in Mark 14.53–65. I propose that the ‘false’ charge that Jesus intends to build the naos acheiropoiētos (‘sanctuary not made with hands’, 14.58) evokes not a people but a place—the sanctuary in the heavens. Mark thereby invites the audience to envisage the Son of Man’s ascension and enthronement (cf. 14.62), interpreted through the lenses of Dan. 7.13 and Ps. 110 (109 LXX), as the installation of a heavenly priest. This in turn suggests that the ‘blasphemy’ charge in 14.64 is not a piece of abstract Christology, but a grander christological and socio-political exposition of the implications of Christ’s heavenly session for the evangelist and his auditors.
Journal of Theological Studies, 2018
Although the general tenor of Mark 2:23-28 is apparent to most readers of the Second Gospel, the ... more Although the general tenor of Mark 2:23-28 is apparent to most readers of the Second Gospel, the appeal of Mark's Jesus to "what David did" in 1 Samuel 21:2-10 has struck many as more than a little ironic. On the one hand, Jesus presents himself as an authoritative interpreter of the Jewish scriptures, one who is prepared to face off with the legal experts of the day. On the other, his rendition of the events in 1 Sam 21:2-10 has left many wondering whether Jesus has actually read what David did. This study reexamines three of the perennial "problems" with Jesus's appeal to 1 Sam 21:2-10 within their ancient Jewish context. Its aim is not to solve these "problems," but to scrutinize the methodological assumptions informing why certain features of this account are widely deemed problematic.
Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha, 2018
Despite burgeoning interest in Pseudo-Philo’s use of the Jewish scriptures, little to date has be... more Despite burgeoning interest in Pseudo-Philo’s use of the Jewish scriptures, little to date has been said about the writer’s psalm of David (LAB 59.4). In fact, outside of Strugnell’s reconstruction of the psalm’s Vorlage (1965) and Jacobson’s two-volume commentary (1996), virtually nothing has been written about this section of LAB. This article demonstrates that LAB 59.4 constitutes a sophisticated piece of scriptural exegesis that fits within the writer's well-established hermeneutical strategies. It identifies plausible intertexts comprising LAB’s psalm and traces the hermeneutical techniques that attracted Pseudo-Philo to these passages of scripture.
Currents in Biblical Research, 2017
It has become something of a commonplace within recent scholarship on the Gospels to hear that Ma... more It has become something of a commonplace within recent scholarship on the Gospels to hear that Mark the evangelist is ambivalent about Davidic sonship. Yet, rarely have scholars explored the rationale underlying this ambivalence. This article probes the status quaestionis on Jesus’ Davidic status in Mark’s Gospel via a history-of-interpretation survey of the Davidssohnfrage (Mk 12.35-37). It demonstrates that, despite their varying approaches and ideological commitments, all participants in the Son-of-David debate have assumed a foundational methodological principle: one assesses Mark’s position on Davidic messiahship by isolating pericopes with the name ‘David’. This explains why the healing of blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10.46-52) has long been fixed as the de facto crux interpretum for Davidic sonship in Mark.
Journal of Biblical Literature, 2017
The christological title ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Holy One of God”) appears a total of three times ... more The christological title ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Holy One of God”) appears a total of three times in the New Testament (Mark 1:24; Luke 4:34; John 6:69), and is unattested in other Jewish and Christian literature. While scholars offer a wide range of proposals concerning the background and significance of this title, no one has demonstrated the possibility of a link with messianic traditions. This article fills this lacuna in two ways. First, I examine four texts (Ps 88:19 LXX; LAB 59:2; Pss 152, 153) that explicitly refer to the anointed David as God’s “holy one,” and two additional sources that indicate awareness of the archaic tradition that the oil used to anoint Israel’s kings was holy (Ps 89:21 [88:21]; 11QPsa XXVIII, 11; Josephus, Ant. 6.157). Second, I explore how the underlying logical connection between “messiah” and “holy one” within these texts illuminates certain features of Mark’s Gospel: (1) Jesus’s baptism as messianic anointing and his ensuing wilderness temptation (Mark 1:9–13), (2) the logical connection between the baptism-temptation sequence (1:9–13) and Jesus’s first act of public ministry (1:21–28), and (3) the exorcistic connotations surrounding the “son of David” title.
Journal of Theological Studies, 2015
The purpose of this short note is to contribute an additional piece of data to the on-going debat... more The purpose of this short note is to contribute an additional piece of data to the on-going debate on how best to translate εἰς αὐτόν in Mark 1:10. All agree that the most plausible translations are either “into”— taking εἰς in its most natural sense—or “on/upon”—taking εἰς as roughly equivalent to ἐπί. While proponents of the latter view typically appeal to the grammatical possibility that εἰς can encroach upon the semantic domain of ἐπί, they rarely, if ever, point to an instance where this occurs in Mark. In this note, I demonstrate that the “Parable of the Sower” (Mark 4:3–9) and its subsequent interpretation (4:13–20) provide one instance where it appears Mark has conflated εἰς with ἐπί.
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 2015
Among the text-critical issues perennially debated is the question of whether υἱοῦ θεοῦ (