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

Re: [XTalk] Disciples' Name changing

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    ... From: Gordon Raynal To: Cc: Michael Ensley Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005
    Message 1 of 49 , Feb 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Gordon Raynal" <scudi1@...>
      To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
      Cc: "Michael Ensley" <mensley@...>
      Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 7:58 AM
      Subject: Re: [XTalk] Disciples' Name changing



      > At any rate, just some fun pure speculation. Whatever this, I do think
      > we're dealing with a movement of connected families.
      > Gordon Raynal
      > Inman, SC

      I think the entire movement is a family "business." James. the "greater"
      and John (Yaqub bar Zebedy and Yohanon bar Zebedy) are Jesus' cousins, sons
      of Zebedy and Mary's sister Salome. Matthew and James, the "lesser"
      (Mattaya bar Halpy and Yaqub bar Halpy) are also cousins, the sons of
      Joseph's brother Alphaeus/Clopas and the "other Mary." Another son of
      Alphaeus (Shymeon) succeeds James, the Just. Yehudah Tadday (Jude
      Thaddeus) was the son of James Zebedee. In addition we read of Jesus' aunts
      supporting the group and accompanying them (Salome and the "other Mary).

      Jack
    • Ernest Pennells
      [David Hindley] ... seems to later than Jesus (I find the short-order succession of events the most probable)
      Message 49 of 49 , Feb 12, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        [David Hindley]
        >The hairy thing about it, for me, is that the date of the baptist's death
        seems to later than Jesus' (I find the short-order succession of events the
        most probable)<

        I'm getting a bit confused here, David. Josephus links the Herodias affair
        with the Aretas war, despite the time lapse. Josephus cites JBap's
        teaching, baptism and powerful influence as reasons for getting rid of him,
        but in this case doesn't seem to make specific ties to events leading to the
        war. Popular opinion does cite the defeat as a punishment for his
        execution, but does that demand close dating?

        I admit to wanting to have my cake and eat it! There seems to be widespread
        acceptance that the war with Aretas came after JBap and the passion. I am
        not aware of any challenge to the Herodias affair predating the Gospel
        period. That leaves me lots of wriggle room. I can indulge myself on two
        fronts - history and tradition. Yippee! (British translation of YEEHAAA!)

        Richard Anderson's contribution to this discussion adds to your own comment
        about dates being hotly debated. I lack the expertise to unravel that
        knotted skein.

        [David Hindley]
        >Then again, there *is* that saying about kings not going to war without
        "counting the costs." What thinkest thou, Ernest?<

        The Dominical saying about a foolish king going to war does not necessarily
        have to follow actual war with Aretas. It also makes sense in the context
        of a Galilee in which Antipas is preparing for war, with scant public
        support, which is exactly the scenario I am suggesting as a factor in
        interpreting tradition. It also harmonises with my favourite personal
        speculation (with no support that I know of): that the instructions given
        to the twelve and seventy were to counter the impact of recruiting and
        provisioning officers marauding around Galilee like a pack of ravenous
        wolves, on a forced muster for a nervous Antipas.

        Regards,

        Ernie Pennells
        Apartment 4, Level 12, Samaa El Maadi Tower No 2B,
        28 Corniche El Nil, Cairo, Egypt
        Tel: (20-2) 526 6383
        http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/robots/03-1982.html
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.