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

Re: [XTalk] Matt 4:3//Lk. 4:3

Expand Messages
  • David Cavanagh
    ... Dear Jeffrey, Sorry to be so thick, but can you explain the point of the question for the benefit of a poor amateur theologian who often doesn t get the
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 30, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:
      >
      > What evidence may be put forward to support the claim that GENWNTAI in
      > Matt. 4:3//Lk. 4:3 means 'be made', not 'become', and that the hINA
      > found there is "ecbatic" or eventual?
      >





      Dear Jeffrey,

      Sorry to be so thick, but can you explain the point of the question for
      the benefit of a poor amateur theologian who often doesn't get the
      technical niceties?

      David Cavanagh
      Major (The Salvation Army)
      Naples (Italy)


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jeffrey B. Gibson
      ... Dear Jeffrey, ... It would mean that the petition is not aimed at getting Jesus to work a miracle, but to induce Jesus to act like Israel did when it was
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 30, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        David Cavanagh wrote:
        > Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:
        >
        >> What evidence may be put forward to support the claim that GENWNTAI in
        >> Matt. 4:3//Lk. 4:3 means 'be made', not 'become', and that the hINA
        >> found there is "ecbatic" or eventual?
        >>
        >>
        Dear Jeffrey,
        > Sorry to be so thick, but can you explain the point of the question for
        > the benefit of a poor amateur theologian who often doesn't get the
        > technical niceties?
        >

        It would mean that the petition is not aimed at getting Jesus to work a miracle, but to induce Jesus to act like Israel did when it was hungered to demand that God produce one for him.

        In other words, instead of meaning 'You yourself, Jesus, through power
        which you possess as Son of God, make these(this) stones(stone) bread',
        as it usually thought to do, it would mean 'Give the command (to God)
        in order that these stones might be made (by God into) bread. After
        all, that's what Jesus' reply to the petition suggests that it means.

        Jeffrey

        --
        Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
        1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
        Chicago, Illinois
        e-mail jgibson000@...
      • David Cavanagh
        Dear Jeffrey, Thanks....so the point would be that instead of proving his own power, Jesus is being tempted to prove that he (the personal representative of
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 30, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Jeffrey,

          Thanks....so the point would be that instead of proving his own power,
          Jesus is being tempted to prove that he (the personal representative of
          the new Israel) is specially favoured by God?

          David Cavanagh
          Major (The Salvation Army)
          Naples (Italy)



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jeffrey B. Gibson
          ... First of all, he is not tempted. He is tested. And there is absolutely no hint in the temptation story that Jesus is in need of, or is in any way
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 30, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            David Cavanagh wrote:
            > Dear Jeffrey,
            >
            > Thanks....so the point would be that instead of proving his own power,
            > Jesus is being tempted to prove that he (the personal representative of
            > the new Israel) is specially favoured by God?
            >
            First of all, he is not tempted. He is tested. And there is absolutely
            no hint in the "temptation" story that Jesus is in need of, or is in any
            way concerned about, having it proved that he is the object of God's
            special favour. That he is -- and that he and the Devil know it -- is
            the presupposition of the story.

            Jesus is tested to see if he will refuse to do what Israel did when
            under the hardship of 'hunger', they, contrary to what Deut. 8: (cf.
            esp. vv. 15-17; cf. Deut. 6:16) says they should have done, put god to
            the test and demanded that God fulfill his obligations to "his son" by
            feeding them.

            Jeffrey

            --
            Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
            1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
            Chicago, Illinois
            e-mail jgibson000@...
          • David Cavanagh
            ... Fair point about temptation and testing: I m aware of the argument, but just followed the traditional (and majority) translation. If Jesus is being
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 30, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              >
              >
              > Dear Jeffrey, you wrote:
              > >
              > First of all, he is not tempted. He is tested. And there is absolutely
              > no hint in the "temptation" story that Jesus is in need of, or is in any
              > way concerned about, having it proved that he is the object of God's
              > special favour. That he is -- and that he and the Devil know it -- is
              > the presupposition of the story.
              >








              Fair point about temptation and testing: I'm aware of the argument, but
              just followed the traditional (and majority) translation.

              If Jesus is being paralleled with Israel, however, I suggest that builds
              in the question of God's favour. That both Jesus and the Devil know that
              Jesus is God's "son" is true; but unless we opt for a simple appeal for
              hunger, what is the Devil supposed to be hinging the test on? "Go on, if
              you're really God's (beloved) Son, prove it! Tell him to turn these
              stones into bread, then you'll have something to eat!". I'm aware, as
              you suggest in the following paragraph (below) that the issue at stake
              is trust -but the nature of testing/temptation is that the real issue is
              veiled (it's not very effective to say, "I'm going to test your trust
              now"!).
              >
              >
              > Jesus is tested to see if he will refuse to do what Israel did when
              > under the hardship of 'hunger', they, contrary to what Deut. 8: (cf.
              > esp. vv. 15-17; cf. Deut. 6:16) says they should have done, put god to
              > the test and demanded that God fulfill his obligations to "his son" by
              > feeding them.
              >








              David Cavanagh
              Major (The Salvation Army)
              Naples (Italy)


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.