Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Duck · 12-11-2005, 06:20 PM

1 Timothy 5:18:
For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages."

Luke 10:7:
Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.

The phrase "for the worker deserves his wages" is identical in the Greek manuscripts, and, therefore, Christians have argued that 1 Timothy is quoting Luke as Scripture.

Doesn't quite make sense to me. Seems more likely that Luke and the author of 1 Timothy (often considered to be Paul, but in dispute), were quoting an OT passage, possibly from Deutoronomy.

Any comments?

Chris Weimer · 12-11-2005, 06:49 PM

If dependence between 1 Timothy and Luke is true, and Paul did indeed write the Pastorals, it would make far more sense that Luke borrowed from 1 Timothy instead of the other way around.

Steven Avery · 12-11-2005, 06:49 PM

Hi Duck,

Ask two people to quote a passage, even give them both a liberty to do a widely divergent reading from the actual text, and see how often they will both give divergent readings that match one another.

ie. there is a rather basic probabilistic principle involved.

(btw, there is one minor difference in the Greek of the two passages. I'll let the Zorbas work that out for you.)

Shalom,
Steven
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Steven Avery · 12-11-2005, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

If dependence between 1 Timothy and Luke is true, and Paul did indeed write the Pastorals, it would make far more sense that Luke borrowed from 1 Timothy instead of the other way around.

This of course has a huge problem, in that Paul specifically says he is quoting scripture/graphe, a word that is used in a very specific sense the 51 times it is used in the NT. Without dependence on Luke, it would be the orphan incorrect usage of graphe, there would be no point for the Timothy wordage.

Of course, the skeptics have to try to fit everything into their "nothing is like it appears" NT box, the skeptic presuppositional straightjacket that we have been seeing time and again on the forum.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Chris Weimer · 12-11-2005, 06:58 PM

Praxeus shows his bias - Zorba is a derogatory term for a Greek, and often Peshitta-primacists use it to refer to those who maintain that the NT was written in Greek.

And yes, there is a slight difference. Luke's has "for" in his statement, while Paul leaves it out, except that if Paul had not left it out, it would not have made sense in Greek.

Steven Avery · 12-11-2005, 07:02 PM

Even more ironically, don't you folks argue for a super-late pastorals ? You gonna change that now to come up with an explanation of this verse ? Or are you those of you who would normally at least allow for a first century Luke now going to have to push it back 30-50 years because of this verse?

To be clear, I am really just trying to help you think consistently. Personally I believe Luke was about 50 AD by Luke, and 1 Timothy about 10 years later by Paul, so I am not encouraging various alternative competing late dating scenarios, just pointing out that webs can be very difficult to weave.....

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Steven Avery · 12-11-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

Praxeus shows his bias - Zorba is a derogatory term for a Greek, and often Peshitta-primacists use it to refer to those who maintain that the NT was written in Greek.

Yep, I saw the term in Paul Younan's forum. However, I just think of it as humorous, not derogatory. Your attacks on the errors of the Peshitta Primacy position are now your only posts that I try to follow and collate, to add to my arsenal. On that issue, keep up the good work.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

JEST2ASK · 12-11-2005, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duck

1 Timothy 5:18:
For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages."

Luke 10:7:
Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.

The phrase "for the worker deserves his wages" is identical in the Greek manuscripts, and, therefore, Christians have argued that 1 Timothy is quoting Luke as Scripture.

Doesn't quite make sense to me. Seems more likely that Luke and the author of 1 Timothy (often considered to be Paul, but in dispute), were quoting an OT passage, possibly from Deutoronomy.

Any comments?

1-Corinthians 10:27 (KJV)
If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner and you desire to go , eat whatever is set before you asking no question for conscience sake

Should I thus believe that Luke was quoting Paul and later Paul quotes not his earlier writings but Luke

Chris Weimer · 12-11-2005, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by praxeus

Yep, I saw the term in Paul Younan's forum. However, I just think of it as humorous, not derogatory. Your attacks on the errors of the Peshitta Primacy position are now your only posts that I try to follow and collate, to add to my arsenal. On that issue, keep up the good work.

I apologize for the immediate jump to conclusion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by praxeus

Even more ironically, don't you folks argue for a super-late pastorals ? You gonna change that now to come up with an explanation of this verse ? Or are you those of you who would normally at least allow for a first century Luke now going to have to push it back 30-50 years because of this verse?

Actually, I clearly put the qualifier "if Paul indeed wrote the Pastorals".

Quote:

To be clear, I am really just trying to help you think consistently. Personally I believe Luke was about 50 AD by Luke, and 1 Timothy about 10 years later by Paul, so I am not encouraging various alternative competing late dating scenarios, just pointing out that webs can be very difficult to weave.....

What's the basis for this dating? In fact, this is the most important question I have for you.

JEST2ASK · 12-11-2005, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duck

1 Timothy 5:18:
(1) For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages."

Doesn't quite make sense to me. Seems more likely that Luke and the author of 1 Timothy (often considered to be Paul, but in dispute), were quoting an OT passage, possibly from Deutoronomy.

Any comments?

Deutronomy 25:4
You shall not muzzle the Ox while it treads out the grain ...
(IMO) the source for (1) For the workman deserves his wages is likely condensed from 1 - Corithians chapter 9 where Paul urges that those who preach the gospel be compensated (agian my $.02)

ETA sorry to intrude it seems this is part of a larger continuing discussion

12-11-2005, 06:20 PM	#1
Duck Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Walden Pond Posts: 274	Does Paul quote Luke as Scripture? 1 Timothy 5:18: For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages." Luke 10:7: Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house. The phrase "for the worker deserves his wages" is identical in the Greek manuscripts, and, therefore, Christians have argued that 1 Timothy is quoting Luke as Scripture. Doesn't quite make sense to me. Seems more likely that Luke and the author of 1 Timothy (often considered to be Paul, but in dispute), were quoting an OT passage, possibly from Deutoronomy. Any comments?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-11-2005, 06:49 PM	#2
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	If dependence between 1 Timothy and Luke is true, and Paul did indeed write the Pastorals, it would make far more sense that Luke borrowed from 1 Timothy instead of the other way around.

12-11-2005, 06:49 PM	#3
Steven Avery Banned Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 2,293	Hi Duck, Ask two people to quote a passage, even give them both a liberty to do a widely divergent reading from the actual text, and see how often they will both give divergent readings that match one another. ie. there is a rather basic probabilistic principle involved. (btw, there is one minor difference in the Greek of the two passages. I'll let the Zorbas work that out for you.) Shalom, Steven http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

12-11-2005, 06:58 PM	#5
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	Praxeus shows his bias - Zorba is a derogatory term for a Greek, and often Peshitta-primacists use it to refer to those who maintain that the NT was written in Greek. And yes, there is a slight difference. Luke's has "for" in his statement, while Paul leaves it out, except that if Paul had not left it out, it would not have made sense in Greek.

12-11-2005, 07:02 PM	#6
Steven Avery Banned Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 2,293	Even more ironically, don't you folks argue for a super-late pastorals ? You gonna change that now to come up with an explanation of this verse ? Or are you those of you who would normally at least allow for a first century Luke now going to have to push it back 30-50 years because of this verse? To be clear, I am really just trying to help you think consistently. Personally I believe Luke was about 50 AD by Luke, and 1 Timothy about 10 years later by Paul, so I am not encouraging various alternative competing late dating scenarios, just pointing out that webs can be very difficult to weave..... Shalom, Steven Avery http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.