Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-09-2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

IIRC Jonathan Kirsch thinks that the rough Greek in Revelation was a deliberate part of the message, a rejection of the pagan Greek culture around the author.

From what I can tell through an admittedly very quick perusal of the discussions of the vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and style of AoJ in the commentaries on this book by Aune, Caird, Swete, Beale, Sweetnam, Osbourbe, and Mounce, Kirsh is pretty much alone in this. Does he cite anyone who backs him up?

Quote:

I think I have read similar speculation about Mark.

I'd be grateful to know where.

In any case, I'm not sure that I'd describe the Greek of AoJ as rough, and even if I did I'd be very careful to note that it in no way resembles the Greek of GMark.

Jeffrey

gentleexit · 01-09-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

H.B. Swete had to say about the Greek of the Book of Revelation in his discussion of its vocabulary, syntax, and style:

Quote:

The Apocalypse of John stands alone among Greek literary writings in its disregard for the ordinary rules of syntax. ... The book seems openly and deliberately to defy the grammarian (The Apocalypse of St. John, p. cxx).

Thanks. Wow. Now if truly alone, here's truly inspired work! Is it really a one off? Alone among surviving "prophetic rants"?

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-09-2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gentleexit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

H.B. Swete had to say about the Greek of the Book of Revelation in his discussion of its vocabulary, syntax, and style:

Thanks. Wow. Now if truly alone, here's truly inspired work! Is it really a one off? Alone among surviving "prophetic rants"?

Not at all. The phrase "truly alone" is used by Swete only with reference to AoJ's Greek syntax, not its message, its origin, or its degeree of "inspiration", let alone its contents, its exchatological vision, its theology, and its purpose.

I suggest that you have a look at what Swete (and other commentators) has (have) to say about the book's thematic, theological, functional, and situational relation to/with other Jewish apocalyptic writings and Apocalypses.

Jeffrey

patcleaver · 01-09-2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

In the same way, the sayings of Jesus were probably all just sayings of various sages that were well known to Mark’s audience – famous Rabbis and Greek philosophers. Putting well known words of well known sages into the mouth of Jesus would be an obvious indication of fiction.

Why aren't these sayings from these "famous" Rabbis and Greek Philosophers written down and preserved?

It seems all this could easily be put to rest if we had manuscripts from non-biblical sources that reveal the words of Jesus were first spoken by some sage or philosopher or rabbi. This would point to obvious fiction, not to mention plagiarism.

But as it stands, the document believed to contain these sayings (Q) is lost, or is a fiction itself. Until someone discovers evidence that these sayings were not first spoken by Jesus there is nothing to go on.

On the same token, when a Jewish audience first read or heard Mark's gospel narrative, those who would know if these were stolen sayings from rabbis and such would have cried foul up front, would they not? Unless they knew it was fiction and it was ok to put those words into the hero's mouth.

If it was meant as history, perhaps we would have rebuttals from the learned Jews. Since we don't... It's interesting to think about.

The library of Alexandria is estimated to have contained 300,000 to 700,000 scrolls. Other libraries of the Roman Empire probably had similar numbers of scrolls (mostly copies of the same ones). We probably have less then 100 of them.

The Jesus seminar found several sayings of Jesus that were said before. Other books have identified several other sayings that were said before Jesus.

Nobody cried foul when when star wars came out. Why would anyone complain about a fictional book?

There was no concept of plagiarism at the time.

There was very little debunking of religions at the time. Nobody debunked the branch Davidians before the Waco disaster. Nobody debunked Jim Jones even though he claimed that he could walk on water. Nobody debunked Heaven's Gate before their final ride.

Mark was not mass published (25 copies) until the 4th century. Why do you think that more than a few dozen people read it in the first 100 years?

Mark is similar to other Jewish fiction. There are several other Jewish narrative midrash works.

There probably was no Q L or M. The evolution of Luke and Matthew simply influenced each other.

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-09-2009, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

The library of Alexandria is estimated to have contained 300,000 to 700,000 scrolls.

Is estimated by whom?

Quote:

Other libraries of the Roman Empire had similar numbers of scrolls.

Which ones?

Quote:

We probably have less then 100 of them.

By "them" do you mean scrolls that were at any time actually in this libraries?

Would you please produce your source for this ("probable") statistic?

Quote:

Nobody debunked the branch Davidians before the Waco disaster [1993]. Nobody debunked Jim Jones even though he claimed that he could walk on water. Nobody debunked Heaven's Gate before their final ride [1997].

Really? Please see the debunking of the Heaven's gate cult (and its founders) made by Robert Balsh in 1982 ("Bo and Peep: a case study of the origins of messianic leadership." and 1995In Roy Wallis, ed. Millennialism and charisma. Belfast: Queens' University and in 1995 (""Waiting for the ships: disillusionment and revitalization of faith in Bo and Peep's UFO cult." and in 1979 by Jacques Vallee (Messengers of Deception: UFO Contacts and Cults) as well as the articles on Applewhite that appeared in the Skeptical Enquirer before 1997.

And as to no critique of Jones prior to 1978, see the series of articles published in 1972 in the San Francisco Chronicle available here. as well as the reports submitted to U.S. Congressman Leo Ryan that led to his fateful fact finding trip.

And as to your claim about Koresh and the Branch Davidians, see the series of articles entitled "Sinful Messiah" that began on February 27, 1993 in the Waco Tribune-Herald.

Jeffrey

mountainman · 01-09-2009, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Why would anyone complain about a fictional book?

Dear Pat,

Not every fictional book is raised to the status of "holy writ" and "canon" for a centralised state monotheistic religion, which acted in direct competition to the extant Roman and Hellenistic relgions of that epoch.

Quote:

There was no concept of plagiarism at the time.
There was very little debunking of religions at the time.

Emperor Julian?

Best wishes,

Pete

patcleaver · 01-09-2009, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Why would anyone complain about a fictional book?

Dear Pat,

Not every fictional book is raised to the status of "holy writ" and "canon" for a centralised state monotheistic religion, which acted in direct competition to the extant Roman and Hellenistic relgions of that epoch.

Quote:

There was no concept of plagiarism at the time.
There was very little debunking of religions at the time.

Emperor Julian?

Best wishes,

Pete

Yes, your correct that some debunking was going on, but Julian was the Pontius Maximus and it was his responsibility to deal with out of control religions.

patcleaver · 01-09-2009, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

The library of Alexandria is estimated to have contained 300,000 to 700,000 scrolls.

Is estimated by whom?

Which ones?

By "them" do you mean scrolls that were at any time actually in this libraries?

Would you please produce your source for this ("probable") statistic?

see for example http://www.historyofscience.com/G2I/...s+%26+Archives

Quote:

Nobody debunked the branch Davidians before the Waco disaster [1993]. Nobody debunked Jim Jones even though he claimed that he could walk on water. Nobody debunked Heaven's Gate before their final ride [1997].

Really? Please see the debunking of the Heaven's gate cult (and its founders) made by Robert Balsh in 1982 ("Bo and Peep: a case study of the origins of messianic leadership." and 1995In Roy Wallis, ed. Millennialism and charisma. Belfast: Queens' University and in 1995 (""Waiting for the ships: disillusionment and revitalization of faith in Bo and Peep's UFO cult." and in 1979 by Jacques Vallee (Messengers of Deception: UFO Contacts and Cults) as well as the articles on Applewhite that appeared in the Skeptical Enquirer before 1997.

And as to no critique of Jones prior to 1978, see the series of articles published in 1972 in the San Francisco Chronicle available here. as well as the reports submitted to U.S. Congressman Leo Ryan that led to his fateful fact finding trip.

And as to your claim about Koresh and the Branch Davidians, see the series of articles entitled "Sinful Messiah" that began on February 27, 1993 in the Waco Tribune-Herald.

Jeffrey

Thanks for your help Jeffrey.

So sad - debunking didn't make much difference did it?

Amaleq13 · 01-10-2009, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I think I have read similar speculation about Mark.

I'd be grateful to know where.

I'm pretty sure MacDonald uses that as part of his argument in The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark (or via: amazon.co.uk). He contrasts the Greek of Mark with the Greek of Homer and argues the difference is intentional.

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-10-2009, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

I'd be grateful to know where.

I'm pretty sure MacDonald uses that as part of his argument in The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark (or via: amazon.co.uk). He contrasts the Greek of Mark with the Greek of Homer and argues the difference is intentional.

Looking at MacDonald's book now. So far as I can see, he makes no such claim. But I may have missed it.

Jeffrey

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.