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

4614RE: [XTalk] Divine men

Expand Messages
  • David C. Hindley
    Jun 5, 2000
      On Sun, 04 Jun 2000, "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000@...> said:

      >>Many posters have noted that part of Ted Weeden's thesis on what
      Mark is up to rests upon a characterization of Mark's opponents as
      possessing a "divine man" christology. And if I am not mistaken, Ted
      himself has noted that he grounds this thesis in the work of D. Georgi
      who postulated the existence of similar opponents in Corinth. But if
      memory serves, much work was done in the late seventies/early eighties
      (of our century) that showed that Georgi was wrong because the idea of
      the existence in the ancient world of representatives of a type called
      or known as a THEOIS ANER was a modern scholarly construct. But I
      can't recall right now (and I'm flying out the door, so I don't have
      time to look up the relevant sources) who it was who put forth this
      argument. Anyone else recall?<<

      FWIW, John P. Meier cast his vote against the viability of the concept
      that Jesus may have been considered a "divine man" by some parties, in
      _A Marginal Jew_, vol 2, 1994, pp. 595-601. In the footnotes (pp.
      614-616), particularly notes 82-85, he provided a bibliography.

      In fact, Ted's book _Mark--Traditions in Conflict_ (1971) was called
      the "most famous example from the 1970's" of a book that made wide use
      of the term!

      The 20th century books and articles cited were:

      Gail Patterson Corrington, _The "Divine Man"_, 1986
      Ludwig Bieler, _QEIOS ANHR_, 1967
      David Lenz Tiede, _The Charismatic Figure_, 1972
      Carl H. Holladay, "Theos Aner" in _Hellenistic Judaism_, 1977
      Moses Hadas and Morton Smith, _Heroes and Gods_, SBLDS 40, 1965
      Helmut Koester, "One Jesus" in HTR 61, 1968
      Hans Dieter Betz, Jesus as Divine Man" in _Jesus and the Historian_,
      1968
      James M. Robinson and H. Koester, _Trajectories through Early
      Christianity_, 1971

      Of these, Tiede reportedly strongly objected to the idea that there
      was a fixed concept of a "divine man" in the Hellenistic world.

      Meier says that Josephus so designated Moses (Ant. 3.7.7. Sect
      179-180), but related it to his prescription of the arrangement of the
      tabernacle in the wilderness so as to give it cosmic significance.
      There is no connection to Deut. 18:15 that I can see (unless there is
      more to this argument than has come out in the posts so far). Meier
      says that Philo, for his part, does not call Moses a divine man nor
      does he attribute miracle working to those he does.

      Has anyone compared conceptions of Jesus as a miracle worker to the
      "Sophists" whom Josephus blamed for the war with Rome? I thought I'd
      find something in Morton Smith's _Jesus the Magician_ (1978), but it
      eludes me (there ought to be a law about having a subject index <g>)!

      Regards,

      Dave Hindley
      Cleveland, Ohio, USA

      PS: Jeffrey, that darn eGroups interface ate my original version of
      this message yesterday evening! Are they having serious problems with
      that new (and buggy) interface?
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic