Solo

Thanks, Ben. Didn't mean to send you on a goose-chase. I actually thought that the binding of 'οτε δε' was itself indicative of a logical disjuction, so "but" or "nevertheless" would be more or less a given. You have already diabused me of that notion.

Interesting though that in the examples you have given, disjunctive events do follow or are implied in the narration:

Matt 21:34 ...and when the fruit ripened....master sends his servants (who are healthy) to his contractors who kill and molest them.

Acts 8:39 ...and when they came out of the water....the spirit abducts Philip

Acts 12:6 ...and when Herod would have....(i.e. did not succeed in having)....angel frees Peter. 'But' could have been used in translation, I think.

Acts 28:16 ...And when we came to Rome ...Paul was allowed to quarter by himself ....the verse actually has a second 'δε' signifying a break.

Esther 1:5 ...And when these days expired.....break in continuity

Tobit 2:13 ...the kid starts to bleat, giving away that it was stolen

Tobit 8:3 ... and when the demon smells the smoke he flees to Egypt...


So, it would appear - on surface at least - that the phrasing 'οτε δε', either disjoins the events narrated or signals a significant change (break/development) in their course immediately following.

Thanks again, Ben. Your lookup has been useful to me.

Jiri

Sheshbazzar

Perhaps a good portion of the reason that my beliefs might seem to be "weird and unevidenced to you", is your not being thoroughly familiar with those facts, and with that evidence on which they are founded.
Permit me to reference a few fundamental and historical facts that existed prior to the development of the so-called "Christian" religion, and its questionable and controversial "New Testament" literature.

Fact number one, is that the Greeks had a long and somewhat unsavory history of attempting to impose their "values" and the worship of the "gods" of their religions upon the Jewish people, even at times engaging in attempts to suppress and destroy all vestiges of the native Hebrew religion and culture.
Some small portion of this is recorded in the Books of Maccabees, and is also attested to by the writings of Josephus and other contemporary sources.

"1 But Judas Maccabeus, and they that were with him, went privately into the towns: and calling together their kinsmen and friends, and taking unto them such as continued in the Jews' religion, they assembled six thousand men. 2 And they called upon Elohim, that he would look upon his people that was trodden down by all and would have pity on The Temple, that was defiled by the wicked: 3 That he would have pity also upon The City that was destroyed, that was ready to be made even with the ground, and would hear the voice of the blood that cried to him: 4 That he would remember also the most unjust deaths of innocent children, and the blasphemies offered to his name, and would show his indignation on this occasion. ............

17 Setting before their eyes the injury they had unjustly done The Holy Place, and also the injury they had done to The City, which had been shamefully abused, besides their destroying The Ordinances of The Fathers. 18 For, said he, they trust in their weapons, and in their boldness: but we trust in YHWH El-shaddi, who at a beck can utterly destroy both them that come against us, and the whole world. 19 Moreover, he put them in mind also of the helps their fathers had received from YAH"....

23 And after The Holy Book had been read to them by Esdras, and he had given them for a WATCHWORD, "The Help of YAH": himself leading the first band, he joined battle with Nicanor: 24 And YAH being their helper, they slew above nine thousand men: and having wounded and disabled the greater part of Nicanor's army, they obliged them to fly.
(2 Maccabees 8:1-24)

9 But the king, with his mind full of rage, came on to show himself worse to the Jews than his father was. 10 Which when Judas understood, he commanded the people to call upon YHWH day and night, that as he had always done, so now also he would help them: 11 Because they were afraid to be deprived of The Law, and of their Country, and of The Holy Temple: and that he would not suffer the people, that had of late taken breath for a little while, to be again in subjection to blasphemous nations. 12 So when they had all done this together, and had craved mercy of YHWH with weeping and fasting, lying prostrate on the ground for three days continually, Judas exhorted them to make themselves ready. 13 But he, with The Ancients, determined before the king should bring his army into Judea, and make himself master of The City, to go out, and to commit the event of the thing to the judgment of YHWH. 14 So committing all to YAH, the Creator of the world, and having exhorted his people to fight manfully, and to stand up even to death for The Laws, The Temple, The City, their Country, and Citizens: he placed his army about Modin. 15 And having given his company for a WATCHWORD, The "Victory of YAH", with most valiant chosen young men, he set upon the king's quarter by night, and slew four thousand men in the camp, and the greatest of the elephants, with them that had been upon him, 16 And having filled the camp of the enemies with exceeding great fear and tumult, they went off with good success. 17 Now this was done at the break of day, by the protection and "Help of YAH".(2 Maccabees 13:9-17)

Being respectful of the ancient Jewish faith, I have replaced common foreign titles and names, with those that were most reverently held by Judaism in its opposition to all other "gods" and "lords".
The name "Yah" was in their daily speech, prayers, and praise (hallalu-"Yah"!) and the YHWH (in Hebrew letters) was written in The Holy Books, inscribed upon The Temple of YHWH, engraved upon the High Priests mitre, and named upon the children of Israel (Numbers 6:27)

The point here being that this is evidence that these Jewish patriots had united in defense of their distinctive Jewish culture and religion, and had accepted a very particular "WATCHWORD" or "password" which was employed amongst themselves to identify those who were resisting Greek intrusions upon their culture and religion, such a watchword being needed because so many "Jews" had already "sold out" to all the glitter and the seductions of Hellenistic culture.
The phrase "The Help of YAH" pronounced in Hebrew would be approximately "YAH hoshua" and sound the same in Hebrew as the name of "Joshua" Mose's anointed successor and Israel's greatest Military "messiah" a legendary hero who had brought Israel unparalleled military "victory" over foreign powers. The "hoshua" having a range of meaning, as "help", "deliverer", "safety" "victory" and other synonymous ideas, all of a most favorable interpretation.
Having so triumphed over their enemies, in their view, by "The Help of YAH", they would have most naturally passed this "Watchword" on to their posterity.

Briefly then, it is my persuasion that Paul (Saul) undertook his "missionary journeys" to convey this "watchword" to far-flung Jewish synagogues throughout the world, with an original aim of protecting Jewish identity and polity, many Gentiles were also moved to sympathy upon hearing his preaching, and he readily embraced their support.
But as is evident by the blatant galloping Hellenism that is displayed throughout the "New Testament" writings, the Hellenistic/pagan elements were able to overwhelm and subvert his mission, and eventually turn his message upside down through their production of the interpolated and outright fabricated "Pauline epistle" propaganda documents, thereby succeeding in the alienating of both him and his actual message from mainstream Jewish culture.
This also explains why there are no contemporary Jewish documents that mention "Paul" or ever dispute his message, He was a Jew of the Jews preaching what was an essentially Jewish preservationist message, one that as it was originally presented by him, was totally non-threatening to Jewish polity, beliefs and praxis.
After the unknown "Christian" authors had through subterfuge, refashioned him in the image of their theology, only then did Judaism began its long rejection of their native son.

Amaleq13

Because either the "false brethren" claimed to be supported by the "pillars" in their demans of Paul's gentiles or Paul wanted to find out if they were supported by the "pillars"?

Gamera

An interesting interpretation of this line.

Gal 2:10 - only they would have us remember the poor, which very thing I was eager to do.

Assuming Romans 15:25 is refering to this charge, Paul disagrees with your interpretation of it.

Romans 15:25 - At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem with aid for the saints.

Paul understands that the "poor" are the very pillars of the Jerusalem church (or whatever you want to call it since you seem to object to this common locution), the saints, the beleivers. They are apparently broke. Paul appears to be sending aid to the Jerusalem church, because his ministry is in the prosperous West. This doesn't appear to be in fulfillment of any Jewish obligation to help the poor (query whether there was any such obligation, at least as articulated in Gal 2; where does it say in the Law that a Jew living in Greece has to raise money for the poor in Jerusalem?).


If we conclude that the Jerusalem church is in financial straits, it changes the whole tenor of the proceeding. Assuming James' epistle has some relationship to the Jerusalem church, if not to James himself, the preoccupation in that epistle with the poor and with poverty substantiates this conclusion.

J-D

It can only be an equivocation if there is a difference between 'the religious pursuit of messianic expectation' and 'thinking a messiah might come'. But what is the difference? If the two mean the same thing, there is no equivocation.

J-D

Does that 'OK' include 'OK, I'll answer your question?'. As we agreed, you don't, of course, have to answer my questions, but I'll draw my own inferences if you don't.

spin

This sort of stuff is why I said, "OK". Think whatever it is.


spin

spin

But what are the false brethren to the pillars that they should even be discussed at the meeting, if they had nothing to do with the pillars or their views?


spin

J-D

Well, what I think at the moment is that you don't know what you're talking about. Is that OK?

spin

I couldn't expect better.


spin