Sheshonq

Not until we close on the arguments from the previous discussion. Are you ready to do that yet? You know - about me being involved in the GMark/Sanders/crucifixion discussion (for starters)?

Or did you think you were going to get a free pass and walk away from these claims?

No Robots

I am only concerned with showing that the term was in use at all at the time.

Not necessarily. They are scribes and Pharisees who love to be called Rabbi. It seems that this is still a form of address rather than a title.

I suppose I should quit while I'm ahead.

Gamera

You have ignored Jeffrey's post. Doesn't it rebut your position completely?

Sheshonq

I ignored nothing.
Jeffrey has other issues to sort out with me before he deserves a response.

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Sheshonq

But to disprove the anachronism charge, you need to show that it was a title in current usage. Not just a student-teacher term of endearment.

The context of the Matthew reference indicates that the usage was broader than the respect shown between disciple and student. Being called "rabbi, rabbi" was apparently occurring in the wider society - hence the references to marketplace, feasts, chief seats in the synagogues (for which no archaeological evidence exists), greetings in the markets, etc.

Gamera

If Jeffrey's reference rebuts your position, nobody has to sort out your position.

If rabbi was used circa 100 bce to mean "teacher," then your position is futile.

Is the reference inaccurate, or do you have some explanation that blunts its obvious effect on your claim? Let know.

No Robots

Why? Because the term is used in the NT as a title? But that is what I am disputing. I am saying that the term is used in the NT not as a title but as student-teacher term of respect.

Perhaps, but that would indicate that at the time it was not a title, at least not exclusively so.

Gamera

This seems to be a very thin reed indeed.

First, this is the only use of the term rabbi in the Christian scriptures that is even arguably a title (at least according to you). The other references seem to mean nothing more than somebody who teaches, officially or unofficially. And of course John tells us that explicitly:


John 1:38 - Jesus turned, and saw them following, and said to them, "What do you seek?" And they said to him, "Rabbi" (which means Teacher),[didaskalos] "where are you staying?"

Second, the Matthew 23 text goes on to again defines rabbi as "teacher," or "master" not as a title, but as a description: (kathegetes in most MSS; didaskalos in the Alexandrine).

Matt 23:8 -But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher [or master], and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. 10 Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ. 11 He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; 12 whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. 13

The point here is that none of the disciples is to take some kind of leading role as a teacher or master in the faith. This has nothing to do with titles, but function and attitude. Christ is their leader and their teacher. And clearly Jesus isn't claiming that Christ is a "rabbi" in some titular sense.

Given that all other references to rabbi in the NT are clearly not titles, and given the ambiguity here, directed toward a nontitle by Jesus' subsequent admonition to the apostles, your claim that the NT uses the term as a title seems dubious.

Sheshonq

Not at all.

That's because all the other references are directed at Christ. What makes the Matthew example interesting is that it purports to show how the term was used in the broader context 1st century Jewish society.


The quotes you used are all in reference to Christ or involving/referencing Christ. You missed that important distinction I drew above.

Sheshonq

But that's the key point.

If the text indicates that it *was* a title at that time then the text is still an anachronism, regardless of whether 'rabbi' was also being simultaneously used as a term of teacher-student endearment or respect.