contain substantial discussions of parts of Philo and Josephus, which often touch on these first-century writers’ treatment of miracle, and to that extent they are highly relevant to the present project; but, being restricted to the single issue of the ‘divine man’ they do not cover the entire field. Together, however, these authors build up an impressive case for dropping θεῖος ἀνήρ as a comparative category in discussing the miracles of Jesus. A comparative work of a rather different nature