... even ... Holy is not the same as pure. In Jewish religious thought, there are three possible states of things in the world: pure, impure, and holy.Message 1 of 5 , Mar 10, 2002View SourceGeorge = historynow2002 wrote:
> It makes no sense to have "holy" water at a weddingeven
> where there shouldn't be "holy" water, and turn it
> into wine for everyone to drink... when it isn't
> HIS ceremony."Holy" is not the same as "pure." In Jewish religious
thought, there are three possible states of things in
the world: pure, impure, and holy. Ritual water for
purification would not be holy water but ritually
Why should it make no sense for Jews to have ritually
pure water available?
Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
On Sun, 10 Mar 2002, michael Hardin wrote: ... Michael, This is not quite correct. We have some evidence that a synchronization process already began beforeMessage 1 of 5 , Mar 11, 2002View Source
On Sun, 10 Mar 2002, michael Hardin wrote:
> 4) Regarding the MG text: The MG text (as far as I
> have been able to read on this board) cannot represent
> a pre-canonical tradition for several reaons:
> a) It's ties to the Diatessaron already indicate a
> synchronization process which did not begin until the
> mid second century.
This is not quite correct. We have some evidence that a "synchronization
process" already began before the mid second century. Some refs can be
provided, if you're interested.
And in any case, this particular passage of Jn 2:1-11 has nothing to do
with harmonisation between different gospels. This is a Johannine text,
although not the same as the canonical version.
Also, in so far as one admits that this MG passage does go back to the mid
second century, of course this would also open the possibility that this
text contains some pre-canonical elements. After all, our canonical
version of Jn 2:1-11 dates much after the mid second century...
> There is no other evidence to support a pre-Ephesian tradition that
> highly regarded either the holy family or the Jews in general.
What do you mean by "a pre-Ephesian tradition"?
> c) If one identifies the hand of the author of the
> prologue throughout the MG, then it is not difficult
> to suppose that this is a textual tradition that would
> have developed post Tatian. I have before mentioned
> the 'sacralizing' that takes place in the MG. The
> 'differences' between the MG and the Gos John can be
> accounted for as a third or more possibly fourth
> century harmonization.
It would be nice to see how you would argue this. And, again, as I say,
harmonization is not a factor in Jn 2:1-11.
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku
The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian