Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Synoptic-L] The phrase bar-(e)nash(a)

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Peterson
    I d add to this Joel Marcus s two-part article on Son of Man as Son of Adam in RB 110 (2003): 38–61, 370–86, which is the S/M reading I d take to a
    Message 1 of 45 , May 30, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I'd add to this Joel Marcus's two-part article on "Son of Man as Son of
      Adam" in RB 110 (2003): 38�61, 370�86, which is the S/M reading I'd take to
      a desert island if I were limited to one.

      Jeff Peterson

      On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM, David Mealand <D.Mealand@...> wrote:

      > **
      >
      >
      >
      > I find it slightly curious that there have been
      > a dozen or so items on the list just recently
      > on this topic, but no direct reference to Casey's 2007
      > discussion of the evidence. Perhaps someone could
      > be encouraged to clarify their stance in relation
      > either to Casey's book, or to responses such as those
      > of K.P.Sullivan (CBQ 2011) or Morna Hooker (JTS 2009)
      > (or something else of comparable vintage).
      >
      > David M.
      >
      > ---------
      > David Mealand, University of Edinburgh
      >
      > --
      > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
      > Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Dennis Goffin
      David, Luke does. Compare Lk 21:32 written after the fall of Jerusalem, with Mk 9:1 & 13:30 which speaks of a generation over 30 years earlier. For an analysis
      Message 45 of 45 , Jun 11, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        David,
        Luke does. Compare Lk 21:32 written after the fall of Jerusalem, with Mk 9:1 & 13:30 which speaks of a generation over 30 years earlier. For an analysis in depth of this question, I recommend Casey's book " The Solution to the Son of Man Problem" (2009)
        Dennis
        ---------------------

        Dennis Goffin

        Chorleywood UK


        To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
        From: ron-price@...
        Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:11:08 +0100
        Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] The coming kingdom


























        Apologies for the late reply. I've been on holiday in the English Lake

        District.



        David Cavanagh wrote:



        > If, as you suggest below, the original statement was thought to refer to

        > a return of Jesus, and the evangelists increasingly saw this as a

        > problem because it was not happening, and attempted to adapt the

        > materials, why do they not drop the reference to the present generation

        > of "some who are standing here"



        David,



        Each synoptic evangelist had a problem when dealing with an embarrassing

        text. Such a text could be repeated in full, abbreviated, altered, and/or

        put in a context which essentially changed its meaning. Thus the dropping of

        a reference would depend on how the particular evangelist felt at the time

        about the degree of embarrassment the reference caused.



        > ..... But Mark is the earliest gospel, and I very much doubt that Jesus

        > "failure to return" would actually be a problem as early as AD65-70.



        Mark, the earliest gospel, was probably written in 71 CE, shortly after the

        fall of Jerusalem. This was fully 40 years after the crucifixion, and plenty

        of time to be worried about the absence of a 'return' which had been

        expected to be imminent. Certainly Paul had expected it to be within his

        lifetime when he wrote to the Thessalonians: " ... we who are alive, who are

        left until the coming of the Lord ..." (1 Thess 4:15). But by the time he

        wrote the Philippian 'Joyful Letter', he seems to have changed his mind.

        (Php 1:21-26).



        Ron Price,



        Derbyshire, UK



        http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/syno_home.html



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



















        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.