Re: [Synoptic-L] Early Beliefs
- Bruce Brooks wrote:
> ..... The lull inBruce,
> persecution after the conversion of Paul is thus noted in Acts 9:31,
> "So the church throughout all Judaea and Galilee [sic] and Samaria had
> peace and was built up, and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the
> comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied." That was quite possibly
> an inadvertence on the part of the author of Acts, but not the less
> valuable so.
> Notice the word "church" and the word "Galilee."
Even taken at face value, this does not constitute evidence that Paul had
persecuted anyone in Galilee.
But I don't take it at face value. It is much too stereotyped and clearly
designed to further Luke's presentational aims. So it cannot be relied upon
as historical evidence. Furthermore this reference to the church in " ...
Galilee ..." is the only NT reference to Christianity in Galilee, and is
thus especially dubious.
>> Need I remind you that there were no "churches" prior to theI take a (local) church to be a group of Christians.
> ..... "churches" is perhaps a tricky word.
Jesus and his immediate followers were Jews.
> ..... Christianity was not first propagated from Jerusalem,Indeed it wasn't. The first recognizably "Christian" preaching was by Paul.
> it was first propagated (by Jesus and others) from Galilee.What Jesus and his first followers preached was a strand of Judaism, as is
indicated, for instance, by the scathing response put into the mouth of
Jesus in Mark 8:33 following Peter's declaration of Jesus as (only) the
Messiah. Seen from a Christian point of view, the first disciples never got
beyond Judaism. They continued to oppose the Christian gospel formulated by
Paul. Hence Mark's persistent denigration of Peter and the family of Jesus.
Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm
- To: GPG
In Response To: Keith Yoder
On: Mark and John
Thanks to Keith for his additional notes on recasting of previous
tradition in John. The subject is a large one, with its own special
interest, and all points are welcome.
One of the skills needed by the successful churchman is the grace to
respond politely when presented with a Festschrift which is small,
undistinguished, and full of internal rancor, one author using his
space to trash the opinion of another author about the date and
authenticity of 1 Peter. Such was the crisis which must have
confronted the dedicatee when he was handed Sherman E Johnson, The Joy
of Study: Papers on New Testament and Related Subjects Presented to
Honor Frederick Clifton Grant (Macmillan 1951).
Fred his my sympathy in that moment.
Nevertheless, there are some shreds of interest in the thing. One is
the paper by Sydney Temple (University of Massachusetts, no less) on
Geography and Climate in the Fourth Gospel. He makes what looks to me
like a good case that the author of John knew Palestinian geography
and its seasons very well: when a certain ford was passable, when the
court migrated from Jerusalem to Jericho, when the high road through
Samaria would have been preferable to the more obvious lowland one.
Does this mean that John, being more cogent about geography than it
seems Mark always was, knew Palestine, and Mark did not? That might be
a rash conclusion. But with Temple's data in mind, we can at least say
that he had done his homework, not only on the calendar, but on the
E Bruce Brooks
Warring States Project
University of Massachusetts