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

Re: [XTalk] Disciples' Name changing

Expand Messages
  • Gordon Raynal
    ... Hi Jack, Thanks for your reply. I m entirely happy with those sets of associations and will add a couple of others to think about... Barnabas and John
    Message 1 of 49 , Feb 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      On Feb 1, 2005, at 4:47 AM, Jack Kilmon wrote:
      >
      >> 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
      >

      Hi Jack,
      Thanks for your reply. I'm entirely happy with those sets of
      associations and will add a couple of others to think about... Barnabas
      and John Mark as kinfolks, too. At any rate, although this subject is
      shrouded in much unknown (like most everything else;)!), the whole
      issue of the family and friend connections in the discussions hardly
      gets much attention. For one thing there are the issues related to
      group formation (the way I like to suggest talking about this is that
      "the Way" began to organize itself out of family/ friend relationships/
      conversations in the time after Herod's murder of the last Hashmonean/
      the aftermath of Actium/ the aftermath of Herod's huge Temple building
      project, as well as his heavy Roman ties and other sorts of huge
      shifts). In this regard, the model of thinking of Jesus as one who was
      gifted "in giving voice" to a growing social formation is a different
      model to think through the issues of "origins." And this model
      provides that other family members and friends were also important
      voices. And further, such thoughts lead to consideration that there
      was diversity in voices/ theological bases/ world view bases "from the
      get-go." As opposed to some notion of Jesus shooting like a meteor out
      of nowhere and as opposed to some pure, monolithic world view/ theology
      (like: "Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet"), such a view allows for some
      thoughts about the "what's" of agreements were in the mix during a more
      extended time of formation and the "what's" of diversity that were
      there from the beginning.

      Another issue for thought is related to the early households/
      communities that were tied together in this extended set of relations
      and extended formation time period. The one's you mention among family
      are a start. To extend it to friends, then such places as Bethany and
      the house of Simon the Leper (father?) and children Martha, Mary and
      Lazarus, the connections to Bethsaida with Peter, Andrew and Philip,
      the possible connections to Alexandria through the Simon of Cyrene, his
      wife and children, to Damascus through Ananias might be considered.
      Such a viewpoint allows for the idea that there were connections molded
      across the Levant across the decades that became shaped into a
      disctinctive social formation across time. Thinking of the movement
      formation in relation to established relationships, a series of
      communities/ households as belonging together as "starting places" and
      the issue of diaspora and homeland relations, views, concerns being a
      part of this all work to give one a different way to put what we find
      in the diverse literatures together.

      To end for now by picking a date for the beginning of the Way's
      formation out of the above, I'd rather suggest that the aftermath of
      Augustus and Agrippa's defeat of the forces of Antony and Cleopatra VII
      at Actium is the appropriate time to really start thinking about
      swirling converstations beginning to come together. Poetically
      speaking, born that day was the Empire of Augustus and the
      conversations soon swirled among these families and friends about
      another Empire.

      Well, thanks again for your note. Just some things to chew upon.

      Gordon Raynal
      Inman, SC
    • 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.