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

Re: [XTalk] The kingdom of God: Did Jesus get it wrong?

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
    ... You may get your wish -- or at least the opportunity to discuss whether there is any fresh evidence -- sooner than you thing. For one of the foremost
    Message 1 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Gordon Raynal wrote:

      > Now, so as to be clear... if fresh **historical** data becomes
      > available
      > that shows Jesus was a mistaken apocalyptacist, then I'll have no
      > problem
      > saying... well, he was one and he was wrong. But with what we have...
      > the
      > above judgment stands.

      You may get your wish -- or at least the opportunity to discuss whether
      there is any fresh evidence -- sooner than you thing. For one of the
      foremost proponents of an apocalyptic (and apocalyptically disappointed)
      Jesus, Dale Allison, will be joining us in a few weeks for another of
      our continuing online Seminars with HJ scholars.

      The dates of the Seminar will be Monday, March 24th through Saturday
      April 5th.

      More on this in the next day or so. I'm in the process of (a) uploading
      material from Dale that will provide the initial basis of discussion and
      (b) drafting the announcement of, and the protocols for, the Seminar.

      Watch this space!

      Yours,

      Jeffrey
      --

      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

      1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
      Chicago, IL 60626

      jgibson000@...



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Steve Black
      ... I didn t have any thing specific in mind - I ll think about it - but I was thinking more in general about how the Kingdom of God seems to have more than
      Message 2 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        > >I guess I would simply want to ask if we have any reason to believe
        >>that the HJ would not have "mixed styles"? I have been reading
        >>Auerbach's Mimesis where he beautifully suggests that one of the
        >>significant things about GMark is that Mark, unlike other writers of
        >>the time, mixed styles. In GMark's case the styles that are being
        >>mixed are tragic and comic - something that was simply never done
        >>back then. I am wondering how much weight we can put on on the HJ's
        >>affinity with wisdom lit. in the sense of being sure that the HJ
        >>stayed clearly within the genre's delineated style? In other words
        >>can we simply point our (rightfully I think) an affinity to the
        > >wisdom style (which is not apocalyptic) and be sure that that
        > >precludes an apocalyptic component in the HJ's style? I think there
        >>is good reason to see the HJ as *also* adopting the "prophetic
        >>script" - and so I think there is good reason to think that the HJ
        >>did not stay within one clearly delineated genre.
        >>
        >>--
        >>Steve Black
        >>Vancouver School of Theology
        >>Vancouver, BC
        >
        >Steve,
        >The one thing I want to ask if what speech of this sort do you ascribe to
        >HJ?
        >
        >Gordon

        I didn't have any thing specific in mind - I'll think about it - but
        I was thinking more in general about how the "Kingdom of God" seems
        to have more than only "sapiential significance" - it strikes me as
        also being a strong "prophetic" metaphor.

        Also some of the parables can be read somewhat "apocalyptically".
        (Whether they should or not is the questions, isn't it - the
        gospelers thought they should - but they of course could have been
        way off...)The clear distinction between the merely eschatological
        and apocalyptic is a modern construct - which is not to say that it
        is not well founded as an observation - but more that we shouldn't
        have too fine a line distinguishing them from each other - I think
        its a little more fuzzy.
        --
        Steve Black
        Vancouver School of Theology
        Vancouver, BC
        ---

        The lion and the calf shall lie down together
        but the calf won't get much sleep.
        -Woody Allen
      • Steve Black
        ... If we take the temple cleansing as authentic - this is not a saptiential act but a prophetic one. This of course isn t a speech , but I think it
        Message 3 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          >Gordon wrote
          >Steve,
          >The one thing I want to ask if what speech of this sort do you ascribe to
          >HJ?
          >
          >

          If we take the temple cleansing as "authentic" - this is not a
          saptiential act but a prophetic one. This of course isn't a "speech",
          but I think it indicates a "script" being followed - in this case a
          prophetic script.
          --
          Steve Black
          Vancouver School of Theology
          Vancouver, BC
          ---

          The lion and the calf shall lie down together
          but the calf won't get much sleep.
          -Woody Allen
        • Loren Rosson
          ... I agree with Steve and would go stronger by saying that the parables are fundamentally prophetic in that they announce God s will for Israel in its time of
          Message 4 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Steve wrote:

            > I was thinking more in general about how the
            > "Kingdom of God" seems
            > to have more than only "sapiential significance" -
            > it strikes me as
            > also being a strong "prophetic" metaphor.

            I agree with Steve and would go stronger by saying
            that the parables are fundamentally prophetic in that
            they announce God's will for Israel in its time of
            crisis, for which the eschaton is the ultimate (though
            not only) solution. The stories do this in a variety
            of ways, of course, but I think primarily by holding
            up to Israel's people their distressing situations
            (both personal and economic) and implicitly harking
            back to the covenant traditions. The stories would
            then carry implications for both present and future:
            present in the sense that a new vision requiring new
            actions are demanded of Israel's people; future in the
            sense that the vision cannot be (completely) realized
            until God's final dramatic action. To this end I have
            found much helpful in the works of R. David Kaylor and
            Bill Herozg, though even they resist apocalyptic ideas
            and reduce the parables almost entirely to "social
            justice" stories.

            On another track, I'm looking very forward to the
            upcoming online seminar with Dale Allison (per
            Jeffrey's reminder). I've admired his work for some
            time.

            Loren Rosson III
            Nashua NH
            rossoiii@...


            __________________________________________________
            Do you Yahoo!?
            Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
            http://taxes.yahoo.com/
          • Gordon Raynal
            ... Hi Steve and Loren, Well:)! a. I don t think that incident is historical, but a lovely midrashic creation of Mark. b. In any event, contra my good sparring
            Message 5 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              >
              >If we take the temple cleansing as "authentic" - this is not a
              >saptiential act but a prophetic one. This of course isn't a "speech",
              >but I think it indicates a "script" being followed - in this case a
              >prophetic script.

              Hi Steve and Loren,

              Well:)!
              a. I don't think that incident is historical, but a lovely midrashic
              creation of Mark.
              b. In any event, contra my good sparring buddy Loren... all prophetic acts
              are not "apocalyptic"/ all eschatology not "apocalyptic." Demonstrating
              that God's justice has a rather predictable way of overcoming those and that
              which stands against it doesn't simply equate to "apocalyptic theology" nor
              "apocalyptic deeds."
              c. Regarding Loren's contention that Jesus' parabolic speech is prophetic
              and decidely apocalyptic (and his favored sources for this) doesn't let the
              speech function in its own integrity, tradition and modus operandi.
              Parables simply are not prophetic utterances. To go to the old sources...
              Proverbs isn't an apocalyptic or prophetic work. And Ecclesiastes has a
              different notion of God's rule, the present and the future from Daniel...
              fer instance. Wisdom speech, communication has it's own integrity. Wisdom
              theology (inclusive of wisdom eschatology) has its own integrity.
              Historically we know from the writings of Ben Sira and the Wisdom of Solomon
              that this voice/ theological tradition continued on just as did the
              decidedly Priestly understanding of the meaning of the Covenant in the
              Temple operators/ operations... as did Royal and Apocalyptic voices (the
              Israelites had a way of saving all the best stuff!). So despite Loren's
              favored interpreters I'll continue to insist that the theology/ ideology of
              the given speech (parables and aphorisms) be looked at first and foremost in
              its own native integrity and in relation to this native tradition in
              Israel's intellectual past. After all... being "wise stuff"... folks of
              other theological orientations could surely meld it, frame it and mold it in
              their favored theological paradigms. "Wise stuff" has a way of being
              capable of being used like that. And, of course, it was capable of being
              framed in terms of "gnostic" theology/ideology... as we know from Thomas,
              etc. (and "gnostic eschatology" ain't the same as "apocalyptic", either!)
              d. Again... I like apocalyptic literature. In modern times it makes for
              some of the best movies and TV shows! Just as an end note... as a genre it
              may be used not to foment folks to taking up apocalyptic theological
              affirmations that would point to a kind of literalism about some supposed
              "dramatic act of God"... but hey... for some fun... can inspire school girl
              Buffy Summers to regularly go route out vampires and save the day for poor
              troubled Sunnydale:)! And to the past... folks on this list would do well
              to read some of such as Thomas Thompson's "They Mythic Past." I'm not
              suggesting this to buy all of Thompson's historical claims, but rather to
              see another way to understand the use of that very creative genre called
              "apocalyptic."

              so back to you Steve... what speech of the materials we have that you think
              HJ said that points you to thinking that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet?
              For just a dandy example of the view I hold is summed in "You won't be able
              to observe the coming of God's imperial rule. People are not going to say,
              'Look here it is!" or 'Over there!' On the contrary, God's imperial rule is
              right there in your presence." (Scholars Version... used quite on
              purpose:)!)

              Gordon Raynal
              Inman, SC
            • Gordon Raynal
              ... Jeffrey, Has Dale discovered a new historical source since SBL? I heard him there and not surprisingly was not much moved by he and Horsely on this
              Message 6 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                >You may get your wish -- or at least the opportunity to discuss whether
                >there is any fresh evidence -- sooner than you thing. For one of the
                >foremost proponents of an apocalyptic (and apocalyptically disappointed)
                >Jesus, Dale Allison, will be joining us in a few weeks for another of
                >our continuing online Seminars with HJ scholars.
                >
                >The dates of the Seminar will be Monday, March 24th through Saturday
                >April 5th.
                >
                >More on this in the next day or so. I'm in the process of (a) uploading
                >material from Dale that will provide the initial basis of discussion and
                >(b) drafting the announcement of, and the protocols for, the Seminar.
                >
                >Watch this space!
                Jeffrey,

                Has Dale discovered a new historical source since SBL? I heard him there
                and not surprisingly was not much moved by he and Horsely on this matter;)!
                Gordon Raynal
                Inman, SC
              • Steve Black
                ... You might be right - this is one of the prob s with HJ studies -first we need to figure out what counts as evidence - and it seems like we might never get
                Message 7 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  > >
                  >>If we take the temple cleansing as "authentic" - this is not a
                  >>saptiential act but a prophetic one. This of course isn't a "speech",
                  >>but I think it indicates a "script" being followed - in this case a
                  >>prophetic script.
                  >
                  >Hi Steve and Loren,
                  >
                  >Well:)!
                  >a. I don't think that incident is historical, but a lovely midrashic
                  >creation of Mark.

                  You might be right - this is one of the prob's with HJ studies -first
                  we need to figure out what counts as evidence - and it seems like we
                  might never get past that initial preliminary step together. Bultmann
                  agnostic conclusions might end up ruling the day. In any event - the
                  best I can do is to venture tentatively out on a limb and pretend for
                  a moment that that we can say that something might be historical - in
                  this case the temple cleansing. Then I can tentatively crawl further
                  out on the limb and go to step 2 - which is deciding how to
                  understand step 1.

                  >b. In any event, contra my good sparring buddy Loren... all prophetic acts
                  >are not "apocalyptic"/ all eschatology not "apocalyptic." Demonstrating
                  >that God's justice has a rather predictable way of overcoming those and that
                  >which stands against it doesn't simply equate to "apocalyptic theology" nor
                  >"apocalyptic deeds."

                  I wasn't arguing that prophetic=apocalyptic. I was simply suggesting
                  that we have some reason to think that Jesus did not restrict himself
                  to the wisdom "script" but also adopted the prophetic "script". If we
                  can agree on this then we have established that the HJ mixed styles
                  and did not restrict himself to one genre. Thus we might not be
                  surprised to see the parables (normally a wisdom style) doing things
                  that they "are supposed to do". Come to think of it - Isaiah used
                  parables - so who's saying that they are even dominantly a wisdom
                  thing?

                  --
                  Steve Black
                  Vancouver School of Theology
                  Vancouver, BC
                  ---

                  The lion and the calf shall lie down together
                  but the calf won't get much sleep.
                  -Woody Allen
                • Jeffrey B. Gibson
                  ... You ll just have to wait and see! In any event, you will at least have an opportunity to say why he has left you unmoved and to garner a response from him
                  Message 8 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Gordon Raynal wrote:

                    > Has Dale discovered a new historical source since SBL? I heard him
                    > there
                    > and not surprisingly was not much moved by he and Horsely on this
                    > matter;)!

                    You'll just have to wait and see!

                    In any event, you will at least have an opportunity to say why he has
                    left you unmoved and to garner a response from him on the matter.

                    Yours,

                    Jeffrey
                    --

                    Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

                    1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
                    Chicago, IL 60626

                    jgibson000@...



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Steve Black
                    Sorry for the careless typing... ... This should read... ...thus we might not be surprised to see the parables doing things that they *NOT* are supposed to
                    Message 9 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Sorry for the careless typing...

                      >thus we might not be
                      >surprised to see the parables (normally a wisdom style) doing things
                      >that they "are supposed to do".

                      This should read...

                      ...thus we might not be surprised to see the parables doing things
                      that they *NOT* "are supposed to do".
                      --
                      Steve Black
                      Vancouver School of Theology
                      Vancouver, BC
                      ---

                      The lion and the calf shall lie down together
                      but the calf won't get much sleep.
                      -Woody Allen
                    • Gordon Raynal
                      Hi again Steve, ... Will stay away from this huge subject for the time being... but simply say that this part of the PN fits hand in glove with haggadic
                      Message 10 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi again Steve,

                        >>Well:)!
                        >>a. I don't think that incident is historical, but a lovely midrashic
                        >>creation of Mark.
                        >
                        >You might be right - this is one of the prob's with HJ studies -first
                        >we need to figure out what counts as evidence - and it seems like we
                        >might never get past that initial preliminary step together. Bultmann
                        >agnostic conclusions might end up ruling the day. In any event - the
                        >best I can do is to venture tentatively out on a limb and pretend for
                        >a moment that that we can say that something might be historical - in
                        >this case the temple cleansing. Then I can tentatively crawl further
                        >out on the limb and go to step 2 - which is deciding how to
                        >understand step 1.

                        Will stay away from this huge subject for the time being... but simply say
                        that this part of the PN fits hand in glove with haggadic midrashic creation
                        in the plotting Mark is after. Having no other sources... not Paul... no
                        from James or Thomas... then this is a single attestation that looks exactly
                        like plotted midrashim for plotting purposes.
                        >
                        >>b. In any event, contra my good sparring buddy Loren... all prophetic acts
                        >>are not "apocalyptic"/ all eschatology not "apocalyptic." Demonstrating
                        >>that God's justice has a rather predictable way of overcoming those and that
                        >>which stands against it doesn't simply equate to "apocalyptic theology" nor
                        >>"apocalyptic deeds."
                        >
                        >I wasn't arguing that prophetic=apocalyptic. I was simply suggesting
                        >that we have some reason to think that Jesus did not restrict himself
                        >to the wisdom "script" but also adopted the prophetic "script". If we
                        >can agree on this then we have established that the HJ mixed styles
                        >and did not restrict himself to one genre. Thus we might not be
                        >surprised to see the parables (normally a wisdom style) doing things
                        >that they "are supposed to do". Come to think of it - Isaiah used
                        >parables - so who's saying that they are even dominantly a wisdom
                        >thing?

                        Regarding the first sentence... that part was to Loren... my good sparring
                        partner on this (and we have had the rounds on this off list... with much
                        good spirited fun!)

                        as for the latter section...

                        Well... me and some other folks are saying this about Jesus' parables and
                        aphorisms:)! Brandon Scott, for one, is just great on this... as are
                        Crossan and Borg, of course. But as to "why me?"... the Wisdom theological/
                        ethical heritage, of course, has its own integrity in Israel's past. It was
                        a quite living tradition across the post TANAK canonical times. And Jesus'
                        parables and aphorisms are stellar examples of this heritage and tradition.
                        Therein there is clear connection and interpretation of the ancient Covenant
                        ideas on God, justice and mercy. Therein there is a clear understanding
                        about past, present and future. Just for descriptive purposes... Israel had
                        it's writers of such as Daniel and writers of such as Jonah, Ruth and
                        Ecclesiastes. Jesus' authentic speech lines up rather nicely not only with
                        genre, but with essential theological, ethical AND eschatological thought of
                        such as old Koheleth's and Jonah's writing.

                        >
                        >The lion and the calf shall lie down together
                        >but the calf won't get much sleep.
                        >-Woody Allen

                        BTW... love the quote. As Brandon Scott nicely says... Jesus stands in the
                        tradition of terrific Jewish ethical humorists. With such as this Woody
                        aphorism... and with a whole lot that good old Groucho Marx would come up
                        with... that's where I place Jesus and his speech... as Brandon nicely
                        says... one of the great resources for such as Allen and Marx in this
                        marvelous, distinctively Jewish heritages.

                        Gordon

                        p.s. just for that lovely "eschatology of the ancient wisdom"... Eccl. 3:15
                        will do nicely (from the NRSV) "That which is, already has been; that which
                        is to be, already is; and God seeks out what has gone by." This, ***too***
                        is a distinctively Hebraic, Jewish voice. And my suggestion is that
                        understanding Jesus' own thoughts about God's rule and the future is
                        grounded in such as this.
                        >
                        >The XTalk Home Page is http://ntgateway.com/xtalk/
                        >
                        >To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        >To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        >List managers may be contacted directly at: crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >
                      • Bob Schacht
                        ... Those with long memories or good records may recall that David Kaylor was an early member of CrossTalk back in the old days when it was hosted by
                        Message 11 of 18 , Mar 2, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          At 12:05 PM 3/2/2003 -0800, Loren Rosson wrote:
                          >...To this end I have found much helpful in the works of R. David Kaylor and
                          >Bill Herozg, though even they resist apocalyptic ideas
                          >and reduce the parables almost entirely to "social justice" stories....

                          Those with long memories or good records may recall that David Kaylor was
                          an early member of CrossTalk back in the old days when it was hosted by
                          HarperCollins. He was one of the scholars on the list who gently coached me
                          in matters of NT scholarship.

                          Bob Schacht



                          Robert M. Schacht, Ph.D.
                          Northern Arizona University
                          Flagstaff, AZ

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Loren Rosson
                          ... Gordon, I have actually never equated prophetic with apocalyptic, nor eschatological with apocalyptic (the latter being a subset of the former). Clerical
                          Message 12 of 18 , Mar 3, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Gordon wrote:

                            >In any event, contra my good sparring buddy Loren...
                            >all prophetic acts are not "apocalyptic"/ all
                            >eschatology not "apocalyptic."

                            Gordon,

                            I have actually never equated prophetic with
                            apocalyptic, nor eschatological with apocalyptic (the
                            latter being a subset of the former). Clerical
                            prophets like John Hyrcanus I and sappiential prophets
                            coming from the ranks of the Pharisees (like Samaias)
                            or Essenes (like Judas) do not seem to have been
                            eschatologically driven. But most of the oracular
                            prophets and popular prophets were, and some even
                            apocalyptically so. It just so happens that Jesus fits
                            the description (so I believe) of "apocalyptic
                            prophet".

                            >Regarding Loren's contention that Jesus' parabolic
                            >speech is prophetic and decidely apocalyptic...

                            I am saying that Jesus' parabolic speech is
                            fundamentally prophetic, with shades of the
                            apocalyptic creeping in here and there.

                            >...doesn't let the speech function in its own
                            integrity,
                            >tradition and modus operandi.
                            >Parables simply are not prophetic utterances. To go
                            to
                            >the old sources...Proverbs isn't an apocalyptic or
                            >prophetic work. And Ecclesiastes has a
                            >different notion of God's rule, the present and the
                            >future from Daniel...fer instance. Wisdom speech,
                            >communication has it's own integrity.

                            My friend, you are simply assuming that parables must
                            follow exclusively in the Wisdom tradition of the OT.
                            You are wrong. Consider:

                            1. OT prophets were certainly known for using
                            parables. II Sam 12:1-6 shows Nathan doing so with
                            David. Isa 5:1-6 presents a parable in the form of a
                            love-song, which provides a segue into the prophet's
                            diatribes against the aristocracy for alienating
                            peasants from the land (5:7-8). Ekez 17:1-10 is an
                            allegorical parable. So on.

                            2. Hosea 12:10 has God promising that "through the
                            prophets I will bring parables".

                            3. Moving into the NT, Mt 13:35 speaks of the
                            "fulfillment of what had been spoken through the
                            prophet", followed by a citation of Ps 78:2: "I will
                            open my mouth in a parable and proclaim what has been
                            hidden..." (In this case, the "prophet" is David.)

                            There is simply no justification for pigeon-holing the
                            parable genre into the wisdom tradition at the expense
                            of the prophetic.

                            >Brandon Scott, for one, is just great on this...
                            >as are Crossan and Borg, of course.

                            As you know too well, I believe they are among the
                            worst parable interpreters. Will we never agree on
                            anything? :(

                            Loren Rosson III
                            Nashua NH
                            rossoiii@...

                            __________________________________________________
                            Do you Yahoo!?
                            Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
                            http://taxes.yahoo.com/
                          • Loren Rosson
                            ... Bob, I was unaware of this; thanks for mentioning. I ll have to look into the archives. Loren Rosson III Nashua NH rossoiii@yahoo.com
                            Message 13 of 18 , Mar 3, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Bob wrote:

                              > Those with long memories or good records may recall
                              > that David Kaylor was
                              > an early member of CrossTalk back in the old days
                              > when it was hosted by
                              > HarperCollins. He was one of the scholars on the
                              > list who gently coached me
                              > in matters of NT scholarship.

                              Bob,

                              I was unaware of this; thanks for mentioning. I'll
                              have to look into the archives.

                              Loren Rosson III
                              Nashua NH
                              rossoiii@...

                              __________________________________________________
                              Do you Yahoo!?
                              Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
                              http://taxes.yahoo.com/
                            • Rbsads@aol.com
                              In a message dated 3/2/03 2:07:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, sdblack@telus.net ... Is it possible that Jesus, fully human, might have grown during His ministry,
                              Message 14 of 18 , Mar 3, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                In a message dated 3/2/03 2:07:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, sdblack@...
                                writes:

                                > I guess I would simply want to ask if we have any reason to believe
                                > that the HJ would not have "mixed styles"?

                                Is it possible that Jesus, fully human, might have grown during His ministry,
                                in His theology, His understanding of God's purpose, and in His understanding
                                of His mission?

                                It seems to me that, especially in Mark, there is evidence of such personal
                                growth.

                                Perhaps rather than following a minimalist approach with the Jesus Seminar,
                                rejecting all sayings but whatever aphorisms do not seem to be
                                "christianized,"
                                and perhaps rather than thinking that His apocalyptic vision was
                                disappointed, there is the possibility that Jesus grew during the ministry in
                                the years from baptism to resurrection, and that this mixture of style and of
                                proclamation can be partially attributed to this personal growth.

                                Taking Mark 1:15 as a starting point, there are at least 2 questions that
                                come to me with regard to Jesus' proclamation of the kingdom - the
                                apocalyptic view of the kingdom of God and the call to repentance.

                                Perhaps Jesus began with a message that actually followed closely with the
                                teaching of the one who "among those born of women there is no one greater." 
                                And perhaps Jesus grew in understanding, and saw a greater proclamation and
                                mission than calling people to repentance, and an understanding of the
                                kingdom beyond the soon to come world apocalypse.

                                This growth perhaps changed His teaching so much from that which He received
                                from
                                John, that the mentor actually had to question whether there was to be
                                another.

                                Richard Smith
                                Chattanooga, TN



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Gordon Raynal
                                Hi Loren, ... Thanks for the clarification here and sorry for the mischaraterization. (others, as you know, do tend to schmooze prophetic and apocalyptic
                                Message 15 of 18 , Mar 3, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hi Loren,
                                  >I have actually never equated prophetic with
                                  >apocalyptic, nor eschatological with apocalyptic (the
                                  >latter being a subset of the former). Clerical
                                  >prophets like John Hyrcanus I and sappiential prophets
                                  >coming from the ranks of the Pharisees (like Samaias)
                                  >or Essenes (like Judas) do not seem to have been
                                  >eschatologically driven. But most of the oracular
                                  >prophets and popular prophets were, and some even
                                  >apocalyptically so. It just so happens that Jesus fits
                                  >the description (so I believe) of "apocalyptic
                                  >prophet".

                                  Thanks for the clarification here and sorry for the mischaraterization.
                                  (others, as you know, do tend to schmooze prophetic and apocalyptic
                                  together). The key here remains that we disagree about this last
                                  sentence... and the reason as we've long ago discussed... has to do with
                                  what we see as historical evidence versus storied imagination. To be sure
                                  Jesus is cast as a prophet in the stories and, of course, in the formal
                                  theology comes to be later affirmed as "Prophet, Priest and King." But as
                                  my historical evidentiary base is not as large as yours, the question comes
                                  up as to where Jesus' speech best fits in its modus operandi and
                                  interpretive schema, and I will continue to maintain that that base fits not
                                  only according to genre, but also in terms of content with voices from the
                                  wisdom heritage in Israel (Jonah... who though cast as a prophet as a
                                  character... is a wisdom work, Koheleth and such as the wisdom materials in
                                  Torah (Deut. 4:5-8) and from the Psalms such as Psalm 90. I've read and
                                  heard such as Saunder's take, Allison's take, Wright's take on what to do
                                  with Q/Th/Luke passage and about the "Our Father." No doubt the "kingdom is
                                  now" (to paraphrase) saying could be and was interpreted in apocalyptic
                                  frames and in gnostic frames. Nothing wrong with those later interpretative
                                  moves. Each has its own value. In the developing lines of kerygma and in
                                  later historical circumstances they are faithful reflections and extensions
                                  by various voices in the communities who anchored themselves around Jesus
                                  and friends. The clearest takes of apocalyptacism as being central for
                                  communities comes in the likes of the Thessalonian correspondence and
                                  Revelation, of course (both, in my view, from the Domitian era). But we'd
                                  need to get into a theological discussion of the works to assess how the
                                  reliance on apocalyptic resources from the past fit with other theological
                                  voices to get at the aims and intentions of each work and that's beyond the
                                  purpose of this group. So this takes us back to HJ... and yes, we'll just
                                  have to disagree because of how we assess what is historical... actually
                                  from Jesus and friends in the late 20's and what is midrash, imagination,
                                  creation, reflection in later times and in other places.

                                  >
                                  >>Regarding Loren's contention that Jesus' parabolic
                                  >>speech is prophetic and decidely apocalyptic...
                                  >
                                  >I am saying that Jesus' parabolic speech is
                                  >fundamentally prophetic, with shades of the
                                  >apocalyptic creeping in here and there

                                  My only comment here is that belief that God is going to do something
                                  dramatic and soon which will alter the course of history and restore
                                  Israel... is more than "a shade" apocalyptic. If Jesus believed this, then
                                  the historian can quite simply say he was wrong. That doesn't end
                                  discussion about what apocalyptic means, its value and what to do with being
                                  wrong. If HJ was this way and was wrong, I have no problem saying so. Like
                                  the host of folks before and after him... well, they just keep being
                                  wrong;)! I'm not going to lose any sleep over this, if I'm wrong. But...
                                  again... I don't see the historical evidentiary base regarding HJ that this
                                  is the case at all. More in a moment.
                                  >
                                  >>...doesn't let the speech function in its own
                                  >integrity,
                                  >>tradition and modus operandi.
                                  >>Parables simply are not prophetic utterances. To go
                                  >to
                                  >>the old sources...Proverbs isn't an apocalyptic or
                                  >>prophetic work. And Ecclesiastes has a
                                  >>different notion of God's rule, the present and the
                                  >>future from Daniel...fer instance. Wisdom speech,
                                  >>communication has it's own integrity.
                                  >
                                  >My friend, you are simply assuming that parables must
                                  >follow exclusively in the Wisdom tradition of the OT

                                  No, this isn't my view. Regarding the literature... from Torah onwards in
                                  the many redactions we see the inclusion of the many voices in Israel's long
                                  history. For descriptive purposes (although there are combinations and
                                  permutations in the writings) one can delineate 5 major theological voices
                                  in TANAK... priestly, royal, prophetic, apocalyptic and wisdom. If folks
                                  want to get into TANAK in this regard we can go into that, but for brevity
                                  sake here... there are **real** arguments in Israel's past and the editors
                                  wisely let those voices be kept. On some matters there were fundamental
                                  disagreements... and about the future and God's work therein... there are
                                  just some whopping disagreements and to pick this one... Daniel and
                                  Ecclesiastes **obviously** disagree about that future. If one accepts such
                                  as the "coming Son of Man" speech and such as Mark 13 is from Jesus... then,
                                  yes... of course... Jesus was an apocalyptic thinker. Correct... and
                                  again... if that's the case... fine and he was wrong. But I don't think
                                  those sayings are from HJ. And as regards their later inclusion they are
                                  quite understandable as relates to dealing with the loss of the Temple and
                                  the later traumas from dealing with those friendly Romans Nero... before the
                                  War... all the way through those lovely figures of Vespasion, Titus and oh
                                  so friendly Domitian... and the likes of voices that were aroused as such in
                                  Josephus who came to the merry conclusion that God had passed his favor to
                                  the Romans. Great interpretative moves to face this and other issues as
                                  well. But back to this point... the wisdom voices in Israel's past have an
                                  integrity all their own. Regarding "God's presence/ rule/ action" there is
                                  quite clear affirmation in this regard. And yes... some kings, prophets and
                                  mama's are shown to say one or more things that reflect God's wisdom. But
                                  ***there are also, to use the outside terms... sages*** in this heritage who
                                  majored in this theo-ethical voice, paradigm and genre. I take it that that
                                  core of sayings so important in Q, in the Didache, in the production of the
                                  Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on the Plain... clearly behind Ep. James
                                  little wisdom summary in James 3... clearly behind Paul's preferred
                                  vocabulary about the ways of the Spirit in his little summaries... ***is
                                  rooted*** in the integrity of wisdom sage speech from Jesus and friends.
                                  This is not my attempt to box HJ at the outset and make him fit some
                                  pre-existing pattern. It comes from the assessment of what I believe is
                                  from Jesus and friends... and from the reality of what we see across the
                                  resources we have. Thing is... when it comes to getting to the core... from
                                  Mark to Paul to Thomas to James to the Didache all agree about this core.
                                  And these sayings **are not** prophetic utterances and the speech is
                                  **certainly not** apocalyptic. And the thing is, of course, neither is the
                                  action direction that Jesus asks of the two by twos. Hence... until we find
                                  some new resources... I think there's every reason to say that this is where
                                  Jesus as an individual contributor fits and this is the intellectual/
                                  theological heritage that he worked out of.



                                  .
                                  >You are wrong. Consider:
                                  >
                                  >1. OT prophets were certainly known for using
                                  >parables. II Sam 12:1-6 shows Nathan doing so with
                                  >David. Isa 5:1-6 presents a parable in the form of a
                                  >love-song, which provides a segue into the prophet's
                                  >diatribes against the aristocracy for alienating
                                  >peasants from the land (5:7-8). Ekez 17:1-10 is an
                                  >allegorical parable. So on.
                                  >
                                  >2. Hosea 12:10 has God promising that "through the
                                  >prophets I will bring parables".
                                  >
                                  >3. Moving into the NT, Mt 13:35 speaks of the
                                  >"fulfillment of what had been spoken through the
                                  >prophet", followed by a citation of Ps 78:2: "I will
                                  >open my mouth in a parable and proclaim what has been
                                  >hidden..." (In this case, the "prophet" is David.)
                                  >
                                  >There is simply no justification for pigeon-holing the
                                  >parable genre into the wisdom tradition at the expense
                                  >of the prophetic.

                                  See the above... but one more note here. You and I tried to get a
                                  conversation going... and I checked a note I made... in November of 2001...
                                  about the base data that people start with to construct their ideas about
                                  HJ. Thanks for putting your short list back to Andrew. So... let's give
                                  this a whirl again, shall we. To all... for beginning descriptive
                                  purposes.... let folks put out there in simple straight forward terms the
                                  "Top Ten" things Jesus said and the ten that Jesus did/ happened to him. As
                                  I happened to jot down my list... I'll put them down again:
                                  Actions:
                                  1. Baptism... Mark 1:9
                                  2. Jesus to Galilee Mk. 1:14
                                  3. Capernaum meal as paradigm for table fellowship Mk. 2:15-17c
                                  4.Lake side Parabling Mk. 4:1-9, 21-32
                                  5.Nazareth rejection Mark 6:1-4
                                  6. Two by two Mission Q/Luke 10:3-9
                                  7. Last days in Galilee Mark 9:33-37, 50
                                  8. Parabling in Jerusalem Mark 12:1-9a, 12
                                  9. Crucifixion Mark 15:25
                                  10. Women witness death Mark 15:40-41

                                  Voice:
                                  1. Mark 4:9 Two Good Ears
                                  2.Th. 47 Mount Two Horses
                                  3. Q/Matthew 5:44 Sunrise/Rain Fall
                                  4. Mark 4:30-32 Mustard
                                  5. Q/Luke 12:6 Sparrows worth
                                  6. Q/Luke 6:27 Love of enemies
                                  7. Luke 11:5-7 Friend at MN
                                  8. Q/Luke 17:33 Save/Lose
                                  9. Q/Matthew 28-29 Consider the lilies
                                  10. Mark 9:50 Salt/peace

                                  (I did this from the notes... sorry if any verses are wrong).
                                  At any rate... maybe folks will actually just lay out what they see as core
                                  and key... and we might actually find in this group where there is any
                                  beginning agreement. We'll see. But for now... unless Dale Allison or
                                  anyone else has dug up something new... we're all working from the same
                                  resources... and... again... as long as there are just base disagreements
                                  about what is historically rooted and what comes from the wondrous
                                  imaginations of these early folks... then we're mostly going to disagree.
                                  I'd just like to see where *** any *** agreements might be found. So...
                                  let's try this again.
                                  >
                                  >>Brandon Scott, for one, is just great on this...
                                  >>as are Crossan and Borg, of course.
                                  >
                                  >As you know too well, I believe they are among the
                                  >worst parable interpreters

                                  I know... and no point in belaboring this... my suggestion nevertheless
                                  remains for folks to consider the integrity of the wisdom heritage past, in
                                  Jesus and earliest Christianity and afterwards. Whatever else folks want to
                                  add to that... and there's lots of valuable insights to be had... that
                                  heritage deserves careful consideration in its own right and in its own
                                  integrity. These writers work at that and therefore deserve consideration
                                  for that even if there are other disagreements. I have my own with each of
                                  them.... but this issue because it gets bowled over or so quickly ignored or
                                  transmuted into something else deserves its own careful study and these are
                                  guys who see that.




                                  . Will we never agree on
                                  >anything? :(

                                  Well... the new Dune mini-series is coming out mid-month and we'll probably
                                  agree on what we think of that;)!

                                  take care,
                                  Gordon
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.