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

Re: [XTalk] Raynal re: Intertextuality

Expand Messages
  • Gordon Raynal
    Bob, Mike, Larry, ... Rose colored glasses... and words about usual lack of adequate reasoning and charges of patronizing suggestions. My, my the
    Message 1 of 4 , May 4, 2004
      Bob, Mike, Larry,

      >The problem with this approach is that it invites seeing the text through
      >rose colored glasses (or whatever hue one prefers to look at the world
      >through.)

      "Rose colored glasses..." and words about "usual" lack of adequate reasoning
      and charges of "patronizing" suggestions. My, my the rhetorical heat is
      high. I'm not surprised as what I'm suggesting is a very small minority
      position (Again, it was reading Burton Mack that I got the idea and over
      some years tested it out.). As I'm going on vacation, I'm going to let the
      posts and the suggestions that I've put on the list stand as I have said,
      and repeated, as an invitation to read intertextually under the hypothesis
      that Luke is dealing with the writings I've listed and doing so in the
      circumstances of Hadrian's reign. At a later date, should list members want
      to discuss this proposal further, I'll be glad to do so. I will leave this
      with one last suggestion: that folks proceed from thinking about the story
      of Jesus' baptism in relationship to communal baptismal practice to
      considering "the 3rd day" (resurrection day) story and think about this in
      relationship to place, leadership/authority and the theological issue of
      hope.

      Gordon Raynal
      Inman, SC
    • Bob Schacht
      ... Gordon, I did not accuse you of the rose colored glasses; I just observed that this kind of big picture approach seemed susceptible to it. That s just how
      Message 2 of 4 , May 4, 2004
        At 07:55 PM 5/4/2004 -0400, you wrote:
        >Bob, Mike, Larry,
        >
        > >The problem with this approach is that it invites seeing the text through
        > >rose colored glasses (or whatever hue one prefers to look at the world
        > >through.)
        >
        >"Rose colored glasses..." and words about "usual" lack of adequate reasoning
        >and charges of "patronizing" suggestions. My, my the rhetorical heat is
        >high. ...

        Gordon,
        I did not accuse you of the rose colored glasses; I just observed that this
        kind of big picture approach seemed susceptible to it. That's just how it
        seemed to me. However, I'll withdraw that comment if you'll address the
        rest of my response.

        Bob


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Larry J. Swain
        ... reasoning ... heat is ... minority ... This is a non sequitur. The rhetorical heat you feel has nothing to do with whether or not your position is
        Message 3 of 4 , May 4, 2004
          --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Gordon Raynal" <scudi1@c...> >
          > "Rose colored glasses..." and words about "usual" lack of adequate
          reasoning
          > and charges of "patronizing" suggestions. My, my the rhetorical
          heat is
          > high. I'm not surprised as what I'm suggesting is a very small
          minority
          > position

          This is a non sequitur. The rhetorical heat you feel has nothing to
          do with whether or not your position is minority or majority.


          (Again, it was reading Burton Mack that I got the idea and over
          > some years tested it out.).

          This is why you are experiencing rhetorical heat. You say you have
          tested it out and have done so for a long time, but are unwilling or
          unable to allow anyone else to test it out and unwilling or unable to
          demonstrate to an audience how you arrived at your conclusions. I
          for one would enjoy hearing it, invite you to lay out the whole
          shebang. But all we've received so far is a running commentary like
          the above.....very frustrating.


          Anyway, that's my tqake. Invitations to read "intertextually" in a
          given period under given assumptions are all very well and good, but
          as Mark Goodacre pointed out days ago, the time for floating the
          hypothesis has long gone, its time to get serious and see if reading
          this way will hold up under examination or whether it is just an
          interesting exercise. Several of us on list are ready to get on with
          that testing and are puzzled why vacation notwithstanding you're
          still trying to get the balloon airborne.

          Have a good vacation,

          Larry Swain
        • Gordon Raynal
          Bob, Thank you for your clarification. As I noted, I m outta here tomorrow, have much to do, so don t have time to get to this now. What I want to suggest in
          Message 4 of 4 , May 5, 2004
            Bob,

            Thank you for your clarification. As I noted, I'm outta here tomorrow, have
            much to do, so don't have time to get to this now. What I want to suggest
            in the meantime is that you do two specific tasks in hopes of continuing
            this thread down the line:
            1. Read that piece by Tacitus from the Annals (easy spot to find it is in
            the intro to Dom's "The Essential Jesus") and Pliny's letter to Trajan and
            Trajan's reply (found it easly on the net) and consider the issues of the
            legal standing of Christians, the charge of "superstition" and the issue
            presenting a straight forward testimony about a founder figure who had been
            killed by Roman authority. Having done that, then think Eusebius' story that
            at the end of Domitian's reign, there had been a backing off (Jude's
            grandchildren not executed, but died natually) and then Nerva's tax
            relief... and yet towards the end of Trajan's reign there was an uprising
            "among Jews" in Palestine and about the Roman Empire... hence the legal
            matters becoming "hotter again." And this "heat" and the foment towards war
            was going on from Hadrian's Day One.
            2. In relation to that then just read the suggested list of issues (10 I
            listed at the outset of this "Why Luke?" thread) in John and then Luke...
            hence Big Picture situation as relates to two related issues: Roman legal
            charges and a social testimony in relationship to them, and Big Picture
            internally... "what's our story?"

            I'm simply asking folks in a broad stroke way to consider the whole Big
            Picture in relationship to the parts, and if you will, "just chew on it
            awhile." Then we can move to particular individual texts in relationship to
            one another and within that discussion of specific issues in specific texts
            in relationship. My next suggestion: "the 3rd Day" story has got a lot of
            inter-related issues packed into the stories of that day and one does need
            to hone down to get to precise particulars that, yes, in the end will help
            establish or deny the case. But I will maintain, until there is just a bit
            of time looking across the suggested Big Picture in relationship all the way
            down to the most particular issues, then to go to a science analogy... it's
            like not being satisfied that sugar is on the table unless one thoroughly
            discusses carbon first:)!

            So, this is my suggestion to you and all who are interested in proceeding
            with this conversation.

            Gordon Raynal
            Inman, SC
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.