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

RE: [XTalk] Sabbath and Circumcision

Expand Messages
  • Ernest Pennells
    [Karel Hanhart] ... I regret that I have not kept pace with the intricacies of your arguments along this theme, Karel. With my study resources still stranded
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 10, 2005
      [Karel Hanhart]
      >I am eager to know your reactions to my explanation of these points <

      I regret that I have not kept pace with the intricacies of your arguments
      along this theme, Karel. With my study resources still stranded in
      Vancouver I am ill equipped to tackle breaching that gap. Meanwhile I am
      comfortably paddling in less controversial waters where the events of the
      Passion are tied to Passover rather than Pentecost, and the record of
      Jesus' frequent arguments about Sabbath relate to the seventh day of the
      week. I must leave the debate on the questions you raise in better equipped
      hands until I am granted an opportunity to catch up on this subject matter.

      Does your reading of the text yield particular insights regarding the
      disparity between the prominence of Sabbath conflict in the Gospels, and
      its relative invisibility in the rest of the NT?

      Regards,

      Ernie Pennells
      Samaa el Maadi Tower No 2B
      Level 12 Apartment 4
      28 Corniche el Nil
      Cairo, Egypt
      Tel: (20-2)526 6383 Mobile 0121001490
      http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/robots/03-1982.html
    • Karel Hanhart
      [Ernest] Members of an age old Christian culture and worship, are so used to think of Passover in terms of the triduum: Friday-Saturday- Easter Sunday that
      Message 2 of 14 , Apr 10, 2005
        [Ernest]

        Members of an age old Christian culture and worship, are so used to think of
        Passover in terms of the triduum: Friday-Saturday- Easter Sunday that
        thinking in terms of Pesach in the night of nisan 14/15 (full moon) and
        Shabuoth (first of the 50 harvest days) is highly confusing to them.
        Students are constantly confused - especially in Holland since the Dutch
        word for the Jewish Pesach and for the Christian Easter is the very same
        word: Pasen. Nevertheless, it is self evident that in pre-70 times
        Christian Judeans followed the Jewish calendar and farmers brought their
        "firstlings" to the Temple on what we call Easter Day, that is the Sunday
        after Pesach (cf. Lev 23,11.15), until the calendar was changed.

        You write about wanting to "comfortably paddle in less controversial waters
        where the events of the Passion are tied to Passover rather than Pentecost".

        I have been writing about the Passion and the (Jewish) Passover in the time
        of Jesus. I simply point out that Jesus died on Friday, which fell on the
        day of Passover that year, and that the story of the Supper on Thursday
        night, was a Christian interpretation of the meaning of Pesach.

        I truly wonder why you and others consider the indisputable historical
        difference as CONTROVERSIAL between the PHARISAIC calendar (the first day of
        the harvest is nisan 16 - the day of the burial story -) and the ANCIENT
        PRIESTLY calendar (the first day should be the Sunday after Pesach - the day
        of the women's vision)? The latter was followed by Christian Judeans,
        Samaritans and Qumranites.

        I wonder is it controversial because I insist on considering the narrative
        as a first century (Christian) JEWISH document? Or is it because of my
        denial of the historicity of the empty tomb because Mark's ending is a
        midrash on LXX Isa 22,16; 33,126 and Gen 29, 2,3,5? One strange aspect of
        the so-called controversy is, that the conclusions I derived from the above
        facts have not been seriously reviewed up till now; they are simply
        dismissed. My perplexity is genuine, I assure you.
        As to your last question (below). The disputes in chapters 1, 2 and 3 of
        Mark should not be called Sabbath controversies, as is often done. They take
        place within the seven weeks of the harvest (N.B. ch 4) and they describe
        the astounding and ever widening effect of Jesus' ministry in Galilee and
        the ever increasing opposition by Jesus' opponents (with a fast forward
        glance at the later post crucifixion opposition of his followers).
        Close reading shows that only two Sabbaths (1,21; 3,1) are involved; 'tois
        sabbasin' in the plural means, I think, during Shabuoth; 1,21 and 4,1 are
        the last two of the seven Sabbaths of Shabuoth (Pentecost).
        The Gospel begins and ends on the "first" of the fifty days of Pentecost, a
        Sunday.

        cordially

        Karel




        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Ernest Pennells" <pennells@...>
        To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:10 AM
        Subject: RE: [XTalk] Sabbath and Circumcision


        >
        > [Karel Hanhart]
        >>I am eager to know your reactions to my explanation of these points <
        >
        > I regret that I have not kept pace with the intricacies of your arguments
        > along this theme, Karel. With my study resources still stranded in
        > Vancouver I am ill equipped to tackle breaching that gap. Meanwhile I am
        > comfortably paddling in less controversial waters where the events of the
        > Passion are tied to Passover rather than Pentecost, and the record of
        > Jesus' frequent arguments about Sabbath relate to the seventh day of the
        > week. I must leave the debate on the questions you raise in better
        > equipped
        > hands until I am granted an opportunity to catch up on this subject
        > matter.
        >
        > Does your reading of the text yield particular insights regarding the
        > disparity between the prominence of Sabbath conflict in the Gospels, and
        > its relative invisibility in the rest of the NT?
        >
        > Regards,
        >
        > Ernie Pennells
        > Samaa el Maadi Tower No 2B
        > Level 12 Apartment 4
        > 28 Corniche el Nil
        > Cairo, Egypt
        > Tel: (20-2)526 6383 Mobile 0121001490
        > http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/robots/03-1982.html
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > 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
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Jeffrey B. Gibson
          ... A very curious claim.  It seems to me to overlook several facts. In the first place, the plural  TA SABBATA was not originally a plural; it is simply
        Message 3 of 14 , Apr 10, 2005
           

          Karel Hanhart wrote:

          >  'tois
          > sabbasin' in the plural means, I think, during Shabuoth;.

          A very curious claim.  It seems to me to overlook several facts.

          In the first place, the plural  TA SABBATA was not originally a plural; it is
          simply the Heb. sáabbaµt or ãabbat --  the "A" is from the outset a purely vocal
          addition to reproduce the Heb. -t in Gk. (see ” E. Schwyzer, “Altes u. Neues zu
          [hbr.-]griech. sabbata [griech.-]lat. sabbata usw.,” Zschr. f. vergleichende
          Sprachforschung, 62 (1935), 10). In practical usage, however, TA SABBATA was then
          assimilated to the comprehensive plur. of Gk. festivals (see Schwyzer, Griech.
          Grammatik, II, 43 with n. 5).

          Secondly,  when we see the noun used in Greek Biblical and related literature in
          the dative plural -- in either in the form TOIS SABBASIN or in the form TOIS
          SABBATOIS (the first in 1 Macc. 2:38; Jos.Ant., 13, 337; 16, 163; Vit., 279, the
          second in Nu. 28:10 LXX; 2 Ch. 2:3 etc.  and also in Jos.Ant., 3, 294; 11, 346;
          12, 4 and 276 f.; 13, 252; Bell., 1, 146,  it is never used to mean to mean
          "during Shabuoth"  (see further Str-BilI, 610f.; Pr.-Bauer5, s.v.).

          Third, the use of the plural of the noun to mean "the Sabbath" is common in Greek
          Biblical and related literature. See e.g.,  Ex. 20:10;  Jos.Ant., 3, 143. Ant., 1,
          33; 3, 237; 11, 77.  See too Ex. 20:8 LXX; 35:3: Dt. 5:12; Jer. 17ò21f.; Jos.Ant.,
          7, 305; 12, 259 and 274; 13, 12; 14, 226  where we find hH hHMERA TWN SABBATWN
          used for "the Sabbath".

          So like your claim about what Papias is saying with his OU MENTOI TAXEI (which
          patently ignores the context in which these words appaer and their referent),  I
          find this claim about the meaning of TOIS SABBASINanother example of your special
          pleading.

          Jeffrey
          --

          Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

          1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
          Chicago, IL 60626

          jgibson000@...
           
        • Karel Hanhart
          Jeffrey, May I refer you to pp 269 - 298 in particular to note 35 of my The Open Tomb on the critique of Schwyzer s article? In fundamental scholarly
          Message 4 of 14 , Apr 12, 2005
            Jeffrey,


            May I refer you to pp 269 - 298 in particular to note 35 of my The Open Tomb
            on the critique of Schwyzer's article? In fundamental scholarly discussion
            it is customary to at least know the argumentation and conclusions of the
            partner before critiquing his/her position. Forgive me for being slightly
            irritated. Are we simply rehashing tired old arguments in this list, or are
            we informing each other of new research and discuss it?
            It is easy to check Bauer-Gingrich, Greek Dictionary of the New Testament
            Literature and then triumphantly cite the article mentioned there [in casu
            Schwyzer's article in your reply below] in defence of the questionable
            position taken by that dictionary as the authority on which one bases a
            reply. Most of us have Bauer's Dictionary on their shelf and it is an easy
            matter just to cite it. I assume you actually have read that article, have
            you? But what do you say about my critique of that article?

            cordially,

            Karel

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000@...>
            To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 1:54 AM
            Subject: Re: [XTalk] Sabbath and Circumcision


            >
            >
            >
            > Karel Hanhart wrote:
            >
            >> 'tois
            >> sabbasin' in the plural means, I think, during Shabuoth;.
            >
            > A very curious claim. It seems to me to overlook several facts.
            >
            > In the first place, the plural TA SABBATA was not originally a plural; it
            > is
            > simply the Heb. sáabbaµt or ãabbat -- the "A" is from the outset a purely
            > vocal
            > addition to reproduce the Heb. -t in Gk. (see ” E. Schwyzer, “Altes u.
            > Neues zu
            > [hbr.-]griech. sabbata [griech.-]lat. sabbata usw.,” Zschr. f.
            > vergleichende
            > Sprachforschung, 62 (1935), 10). In practical usage, however, TA SABBATA
            > was then
            > assimilated to the comprehensive plur. of Gk. festivals (see Schwyzer,
            > Griech.
            > Grammatik, II, 43 with n. 5).
            >
            > Secondly, when we see the noun used in Greek Biblical and related
            > literature in
            > the dative plural -- in either in the form TOIS SABBASIN or in the form
            > TOIS
            > SABBATOIS (the first in 1 Macc. 2:38; Jos.Ant., 13, 337; 16, 163; Vit.,
            > 279, the
            > second in Nu. 28:10 LXX; 2 Ch. 2:3 etc. and also in Jos.Ant., 3, 294; 11,
            > 346;
            > 12, 4 and 276 f.; 13, 252; Bell., 1, 146, it is never used to mean to mean
            > "during Shabuoth" (see further Str-BilI, 610f.; Pr.-Bauer5, s.v.).
            >
            > Third, the use of the plural of the noun to mean "the Sabbath" is common
            > in Greek
            > Biblical and related literature. See e.g., Ex. 20:10; Jos.Ant., 3, 143.
            > Ant., 1,
            > 33; 3, 237; 11, 77. See too Ex. 20:8 LXX; 35:3: Dt. 5:12; Jer. 17ò21f.;
            > Jos.Ant.,
            > 7, 305; 12, 259 and 274; 13, 12; 14, 226 where we find hH hHMERA TWN
            > SABBATWN
            > used for "the Sabbath".
            >
            > So like your claim about what Papias is saying with his OU MENTOI TAXEI
            > (which
            > patently ignores the context in which these words appaer and their
            > referent), I
            > find this claim about the meaning of TOIS SABBASINanother example of your
            > special
            > pleading.
            >
            > Jeffrey
            > --
            >
            > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
            >
            > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
            > Chicago, IL 60626
            >
            > jgibson000@...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > 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
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Karel Hanhart
            Should we not take Mark s clear distinction between sabbaton in the singular (2,27) and sabbata into account? Mark names the day of the women s vision
            Message 5 of 14 , May 14, 2005
              Should we not take Mark's clear distinction between 'sabbaton' in the
              singular (2,27) and 'sabbata' into account? Mark names the day of the
              women's vision near the monumental tomb "day one of the sabbaths (16,2
              plural)." Because this day fell after the day of Passover, Mark must have
              meant the first day of the Pentecostal harvest that should fall on the
              Sunday after Passover according to Lev 23,11.15.
              The emphasis Mark lends to the time-sequence of Good Friday (on Passover
              Day), and the sharp contrast between the burial at the onset of the Sabbath
              and the resurrection message on Sunday, can be explained by the sharp
              contrast between the priestly calendar (cf Leviticus) and the (newly)
              introduced Pharisaic calendar declaring Nisan 16 (the burial Sabbath) to be
              the "first day of the harvest". The introduction was most likely forced on
              the population under Herodes Agrippa I (40-44 CE); it coincided with a
              severe persecution of the Christian adherents to Jesus (Acts 12,1).
              Consequently, the 'healing' miracles in the face of disapproving elders,
              Pharisees and 'Herodians' taking place in chpt 2 and 3, are wrongly labeled
              "sabbath controversies." The term 'en tois sabbasin' (2,23.24; 3,3 and 4)
              refers to "the harvest season" (lit. during the period of the seven
              sabbaths); the healings reflect the beneficial 'harvest' of Jesus'ministry
              as well as the controversy that arose after the Pharisaic calendar was
              introduced.
              The use of the term ''Sabbath" is highly significant and the question why
              the early community insisted on the 'Sunday' and at the same time continued
              hallowing the Sabbath is not an easy matter to solve. As we all agree, the
              exegete is bound to follow Mark's own distinctions and avoid facile
              explanations circumventing these real problems of the festival calendar.
              Part of the explanation regarding John using 'sabbaton' (sing) in 5,9.10;
              9,14.16 is the simple fact that the Pharisaic datings of the seven weeks of
              Pentecost had been official for some 60 years. Another part of the
              explanation has to do with John's peculiar dating of the crucifixion and the
              appearnce to M.Magdalene His Gentile readers would have difficulty to
              unravel the complications of these time indicators. John simplified the
              controversy: With the synoptics the days remain on Friday and Sunday and
              with the Pharisaic dating the appearance to Mary and the eleven on (Sunday)
              Nisan 16!!

              cordially,

              Karel Hanhart


              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Ernest Pennells" <pennells@...>
              To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 8:03 PM
              Subject: RE: [XTalk] Sabbath and Circumcision


              >
              >
              > [John Poirier]
              >>But perhaps sabbath observance is included in Paul's reference to
              >>observing
              > "days, and months, and times, and years" (Gal 4:10).<
              >
              > [Liz Williams]
              >>Yes, and also "Some judge one day to be better than another, while others
              > judge all days to be alike", in Rom 14:5.<
              >
              > Agreed, but I am not aware of any record of discord comparable with the
              > sabbath and circumcision controversies.
              >
              > [John Poirier]
              >>it isn't that Jesus healed on the sabbath ... but rather that he commanded
              > those whom he healed to break the sabbath,... If we consider this in the
              > light of J. L. Martyn's stereoscopic hermeneutic (as I believe we should),
              > it would seem to imply that the Johannine church was fighting against a
              > group insisting on sabbath observance.<
              >
              > Stereoscopic hermeneutic sounds like fun, John - does it come with
              > coloured
              > glasses? :-). Seriously, though, given the strength of the discord
              > around
              > sabbath and circumcision, I am amazed that we don't have direct evidence
              > of
              > disputes around the sabbath issue [to my knowledge: have I missed
              > something?].
              >
              > [Ian Rock]
              >>Would you not have to add a third to these - the issue of diet, which is
              > common to the Gospels, Acts and the Pauline corpus?<
              >
              > Peter's vision; the domical saying about not being defiled by what enters
              > the body; and, possibly, table fellowship issues certainly show there
              > was
              > disagreement on this front. But, again, somewhat low-key compared with
              > S&C.
              >
              > Let's face it: sabbath was a rather more visible issue than
              > circumcision -
              > how did it not generate a rift? The stance attributed to Jesus in the
              > canonical Gospels might easily have become like fuel to the fire for such
              > a
              > dispute, although it is hard to believe that the tradition could be taken
              > as abrogating the sabbath, in line with the dominical saying that was
              > said
              > to declare all food clean.
              >
              > Regards,
              >
              > Ernie Pennells
              > Samaa el Maadi Tower No 2B
              > Level 12 Apartment 4
              > 28 Corniche el Nil
              > Cairo, Egypt
              > Tel: (20-2)526 6383 Mobile 0121001490
              > http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/robots/03-1982.html
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > 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
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.