Fw: [XTalk] Re: Passover Haggadah
- Inadvertently my answer to Rikk was interrupted. My computer sent it off
before I was finished. (I am an ignoramus re, computers). Tomorrow morning I
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karel Hanhart" <k.hanhart@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: [XTalk] Re: Passover Haggadah
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rikk Watts" <rwatts@...>
> To: "xtalk" <email@example.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 1:03 AM
> Subject: [XTalk] Re: Passover Haggadah
>> Oops, that response to Karel was meant to be off list
> Dear Rick,
> Forgive me for being somewhat taken a back by this "Oops note". I am
> impressed with your sticking tenaciously but with good humor to your
> approach. Always ready to answer anyone who questions it ignoring no one.
> Hence, my baffled reaction.
> Why was it meant to be off list? Don't you realize that a note like
> that leaves the impression the person raising the question is somehow
> persona non grata? Does it not make other readers of the list at least
> wonder why your answer shouldnot be made public? Was my contribution in
> your opinion off the subject? Why?. Do you believe with superior knowledge
> that readers need not be bothered? Do my contributions perhaps not measure
> up to what you believe to be the high scholarly level of this list? Or
> must I assume that you have not read my interventions seriously, nor
> taken the trouble to at least consult my publications on the subject? Or
> are you perhaps concerned that your answer might show an underdeveloped
> knowledge of the Judean background of the Gospel and of Judean (not
> necessarily rabbinic) methods for written communication? Sorry, to be so
> blunt. I have the distinct impression that on the non-English speaking
> continent, the latter approach is pursued more seriously than is evidenced
> in this list. My answer to your off list suppressed note, follows below:
> Rick wrote:
> 1. I hope you don't mind if I say that it's not so much your particular
> proposal but my copy of Mark that creates the problem
> Answer: Isn't this simply a put down? I wrote 600 pages trying to prove
> that the classical biographical reading of the Gospel, has led us astray.
> Rick continued:
> it just doesn't look anything like any Passover Haggadah that I have seen,
> and that was one of the main criticisms of Carrington.
> The Psssover Haggadah you have seen in its present form is definitely
> post-70, taking on its official formlation over the years. David Daube, -
> would you question his authority? - notes this in his intriguing - never
> answered - comments that certain structures in Mark's Gospel showed him
> that from the very start the early community
> followed the customary readings and rites of a Passover Haggadah (and
> interpreted them in the light of Jesus' passion).
> Rick wrote:
> Perhaps the problem is with the term Haggadah. If by Haggadah you simply
> mean that the gospel of Mark is a narration of how Jesus brought his
> reconstructed Israel out of exile, then I have no problem.
> 1) I certainly do not mean that! I wonder what makes you formulate a
> notion like that? Did Jesus "reconstruct Israel" and to "what exile do
> you refer"? My impression is that in your opinion that the entire nation
> was living in apostacy, and Jesus sest out to possibly save "his
> reconstructed Israel". You would not agree with those Fathers of the
> Church who firmly believed that the non-reconstructed Israelites lived
> under divine judgment?
> 2) You also show you have not read my contributions. Sorry, Rick. Haggadah
> simply means a Jewish narrative which implicitly or explicitly takes its
> cue from the biblical, divine covenant with Israel. Paul would formulate
> his own radical version of what is meant by Israel and one might agree
> with him. However, Paul still takes the biblical narratives seriously.
> 3) Your suspicion again shows that you are unwilling to enter into
> discussion. You are right that for most people Passover Haggadah is a more
> technical term, usually associated with the Seder, and therefore following
> a particular format. I've already said that two Passover Haggadot emerged
> after the catastrophe of 70, when the Passover sacrifice in the Temple had
> to be discontinued necessarily. One was was in the end became the Seder,
> the other was the passion story. Both grew from the reading of Tenach. In
> the years before Mark First century christian Jews shred the required
> readings with their fellow Jews. But interpreting it "in memory of Jesus"
> laid the ground work for what later on became the written Gospels.
> Rick wrote:
> If you don't mind, I think I'll leave it there.
> Yes, I do mind, because your answer is off the subject. With you I am
> concerned about the Jesus of memory.
> Rick wrote:
> In response to my earlier question, you state that Matt is the first
> unambiguous example of an early interpreter who saw Jesus' mighty deeds as
> purely metaphorical. This is indeed surprising. I wonder if you could
> out just where in Matt's narrative he offers an interpretation of the
> healing of the man with the withered hand, and where in that
> he says, unambiguously, that it is "only" metaphorical? I can't for the
> life of me see any such thing.
> We all know the parable of the Good Samaritan and most of us would agree
> Jesus would want to break through the wall of hostility (to use Paul's
> expression) between Judeans and Samaritans. Josephus witness to the deep
> seated feelings between the two groups. I pointed that the healing of the
> man with the "withered hand" - an odd absolutely unknown disease, making
> the reader "search Scripture" for its meaning - refers to the Septuagint
> version of l Ki 13:4. The expression in its literal form occurs once in
> Tenach (in LXX and Hb) . The arm (or hand) of the king of the Northern
> Kingdom who had commanded to grasp the prophet from Judah, became stiff.
> The reader accustomed to midrash would recognize the incident that
> illustrated the hostility between the North and the South (read in the
> present context the Samaritans and the Judeans. Thus Jesus; challenging
> the Pharisees and healing the man, is a metaphorical illustration of
> Jesus' HISTORICAL teachings concerning Samaritans. (I am concerned with
> the facts concerning Jesus, Rikk)
> The prophet had condemned the sacrifice referred to
>> The XTalk Home Page is http://ntgateway.com/xtalk/
>> To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to:
>> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
>> List managers may be contacted directly at:
>> Yahoo! Groups Links