Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
02-09-2012, 02:59 PM | #71 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
|
Quote:
It could also be that use of Rabbi in Mark is a back-insertion from John or Matt (I;m suggesting, not advocating). Vorkosigan |
|
02-09-2012, 03:15 PM | #72 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
|
Quote:
|
|
02-09-2012, 03:24 PM | #73 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
|
Israel was not supposed to have teachers, because, according to the texts, all were to be personal representatives of YHWH to Gentiles.
|
02-09-2012, 04:11 PM | #74 | ||||||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Orlando
Posts: 2,014
|
Hi judge,
Regarding abba, raca, sikera, mammon, qorban Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In that sense it is like someone writing: She said, "Como Estas?" I answered that I was well and asked her how she was. The context reveals the meaning of the foreign word, so there is no need for the author to translate it. sikera: Quote:
Quote:
The equivalent would be something like saying, "I went to a pub in Athens, and I got drunk on wine and Ouzo." One could figure out it was a drink like wine from the context. mammon:Gospel of Matthew 6:24 Quote:
Korban: Matthew 27:5,6 Quote:
Again, the Aramaic words that are not translated are easily known from the context or can be treated as proper nouns. regarding the solid case for an anachronism. Besides in the writings of Philo and Josephus where we would expect the word "Rabbi" to be used, the Dead Sea scrolls also never use the term. Outside the three gospels, even the Christian texts of the Second century like Polycarp, Justin Martyr, or Shepherd of Hermas does not use the term. Since we never find the word in text from this time period where we would expect to find it, it seems to me good evidence. I agree it is not steel or titanium solid, but it seems "probable" solid. Warmly, Jay Raskin Quote:
|
||||||||||
02-09-2012, 04:42 PM | #75 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
|
|
02-09-2012, 05:10 PM | #76 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
|
Quote:
Yes, Mammon means wealth in the Greek Testament. In Paradise Lost, Milton cast mammon in the role of a lowly rebellious angel who was more impressed by the gold in heaven’s pavement than by the glory of God. Quote:
|
||
02-09-2012, 11:01 PM | #77 | ||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
|
Quote:
Thanks for this post, PhilosopherJay. It's great to see the usage set out like this. It would seem, to my thinking anyway.....that the 'story' re the use of rabbi starts with gJohn. That is the gospel which makes most use of the term. I think that this progression of the 'story' re the use of rabbi - from a very positive usage, gJohn, to a more limited usage in gMark, to gMatthew's negative usage, to gLuke's failure to use the term - could well indicate the social, or politically correct, developments in usage of the term. From an earlier, pre-70 c.e. general usage to a post 70 c.e. usage where 'politics' comes into play. Perhaps it's that transition we are observing in the gospel usage of the term. A pre-70 c.e. usage and a post-70 c.e. usage. It's either a careless gJohn writer - writing very late - after the term rabbi becomes a politically correct issue - leading to the charge of it being an anachronism. Or, gJohn reflects a historical time period in which the term rabbi was socially acceptable to use towards someone meriting it. The gospels are reflecting a development in usage - from positive to negative to avoidance. To turn this around and assume gJohn is the last gospel, it's writer knowing the negative usage in gMatthew and the avoidance in gLuke - and is careless enough to spoil his work by disregarding his sources and inserting an anachronism in his own work, is perhaps to assume too much. From a negative to a positive usage - surely, that, in and off itself, should raise questions? So, a careless, thoughtless writer of gJohn - or a writer writing within his own historical time frame - pre 70 c.e. I do side with earlier dating for gJohn and gMark - pre-70 c.e. Dating gMatthew post-70 c.e. but prior to Antiquities in 95 c.e. (Herodias being previously married to Philip in both gMark and gMatthew - Antiquities telling a different 'history'. One can take this charge of careless writers, gMark and gMatthew re the Herodias and Philip statements, too far and miss out on info the 'careless' writer is telling. ) Dating manuscripts is never going to be the deciding factor in the historicist/ahistoricist debate. Following the storyline developments has far more potential... |
||||
02-09-2012, 11:16 PM | #78 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
A detailed study of gJohn shows that the author attempted to CORRECT many errors in the Synoptics. For example, all the so-called Failed prophecies by Jesus about "this generation" are Missing in gJohn. gJohn's Jesus was UPGRADED to be God the creator and a universal Savior by his crucifixion. |
|
02-10-2012, 12:39 AM | #79 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MidWest
Posts: 1,894
|
There should still be a word though... if not rabbi. For them to reject the concept of a teacher/student relationship they would need to identify the teacher concept by label to reject it, wouldn't they?
|
02-10-2012, 03:42 AM | #80 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|