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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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
    • 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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.