stephan huller

I am perplexed though by Genesis 41:13:

The Hebrew is simply "and he restored ... and he hanged."

stephan huller

This is closest to the form yisu as I am proposing it:

יִתְל֥וּ (= they will be hanged) is the Hebrew equivalent of the Samaritan Targumic substitute for yisu.

stephan huller

But the logic that hanging = suspension or forgiveness of sins has never been fully comprehended by scholars to my knowledge. It isn't that the death of Jesus was conceived as a sacrificial offering but as a 'suspension' (= of judgement, of the sins of mankind). Look at the Samaritan Targum in Genesis 19:21:

The point again isn't that anyone thought that 'Moses' meant that the passage was describing crucifixion back then but rather a formula must have been developed from Targumic interpretation of the Hebrew term nasa which helped explain the crucifixion of Jesus as something which embodied the divine suspension of judgment and forgiveness of sin. It helped develop physical suspension as figurative suspension of judgment and sin.

In other words, I am finding it hard to avoid seeing that Christian theology was originally formed through the use of the Samaritan Targum. The substitution of telee for nasa is a unique feature of the Samaritan text. The person who formed a religious re-interpretation of physical suspension (= crucifixion) as suspending the judgment on others or the nation of Israel was necessarily a Samaritan or someone using the Samaritan Targum. But who else but a Samaritan would do that?

stephan huller

Yet now if thou wilt suspend their sin and if not blot me I pray thee out of thy book which thou hast written (Exodus 32:32 Sam Targum).

sotto voce

I think it has, y'know. It's comprehended by everyone else, anyway. It's a psychological thing. "I save you from your deserved eternal punishment, you do what I want in return." It looks like a free pardon, but it ain't. At least, according to many.

So what do we see, but people saying either that they don't deserve punishment (the non-religious reaction); or, that they do deserve it, but they are going to fix their own forgiveness, on their own terms, thanks very much (the religious response). So the great majority are either hedonist to some degree; or are works-salvationist, to some degree. The latter may be an Orthodox monk flagellating himself high up in an inaccessible monastery, safe from worldly temptation; a 'Jew' who sticks meticulously to the kosher; a Calvinist who without fail dresses in Sunday best to sing hymns piously; or a Catholic who turns up to Mass once in six months, just to be on the safe side!

People understand forgiveness very well.

Toto

It is not being ignored. You are not a heretic, just not contributing anything of interest.

stephan huller

sotto sotto,

But I don't think that would be enough to found a successful religion. The idea at the heart of Christianity is that it was the 'secret' that lay dormant inside the scriptures. What you are talking about is a mere suggestion or an 'idea' which really has no scriptural foundation. The New Testament texts wouldn't have argued from the Jewish scriptures so much if there was no basis to be found in an established paradigm somewhere.

tanya

a. can the Greeks call a god Zeus? What's so special about "Joshua"?

b. It may well be impossible, as you have written, but, your method of elaboration is too terse for me to comprehend. Why is it "impossible" for a group of pagans to name their god "Joshua". You do understand, I hope, that Christianity is NOT Judaism. In my opinion, no self respecting Jew would ever accept any part of Christianity as legitimate, and, in my opinion, rightly so. Jews ought not respect any part of Christianity, for the entire doctrine is based on the false premise that YHWH requires a son, for ANY purpose. That supposition undermines the doctrine of monotheism, and omnipotence of YHWH. If he is omnipotent, he obviously does not need any help. Farmers need help. Goat herders need help. Merchants need help. Generals need help. All those groups profit from having SONS. An omnipotent deity has no need for such a concept.

Excellent point. This question is at the heart of Stephan's thread. How does Stephan know what Marcion taught, or thought, or wrote? What is needed is SOURCE MATERIAL. Does Stephan have a link to Marcion's text?

I believe we know almost NOTHING about the quantity of Jerusalem inhabitants who were exiled, murdered, or left alone.

What we do know, is that the city was NOT flattened in 70 CE, because there were two more uprisings, before the Romans finally compelled all inhabitants to vacate the premises. That is quite distinct from the method employed by Genghis Khan, or the Jews themselves (Sodom and Gomorrah).

Where is the evidence that the Gospel writers knew, or recognized the distinction between the Samaritan text, and the ancient text, upon which the LXX had been constructed? Since the gospels are all written, originally, in my opinion, not in Bart's opinion, obviously, in Greek, then, one must inquire: Was there also a translation, available in 125 CE, of the Samaritan text, in Greek, as with the LXX?

sotto voce

'Jews', Catholics, Muslims, Orthodox, Mormons, JWs and many more don't think so. Neither does any regular poster here, surely. Everyone here confesses faith in Jesus, one way or another. Apart from me. You give yourselves away, every day.

You are funny at times.

There you are. 'Jewish scriptures'.

stephan huller

But that's what we see in the New Testament - arguments developed from the Jewish scriptures. It's like marrying a ladies man and being surprised that he stays a ladies man after he marries.