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

Re: [XTalk] The identity of Mary (Mark 16:40), and protective silences

Expand Messages
  • David Mealand
    Richard Fellows wrote ... Remember also of course the death of Jacob/James reported in Josephus in a passage less problematic than the one mentioning Jesus.
    Message 1 of 42 , Jul 30, 2010
      Richard Fellows wrote
      > The family of Jesus might have been given a particularly low profile
      > in the public documents of the church, so that they would not become
      > a target for persecution.

      Remember also of course the death of Jacob/James reported in
      Josephus in a passage less problematic than the one mentioning
      Jesus. On Josephus and the death of Jesus' brother see
      McLaren, James S., 2001. 'Ananus, James, and earliest
      Christianity: Josephus' account of the death of James',
      _Journal of Theological Studies_ (52:1-25).
      This is a careful historical study of how Josephus reports
      the political intrigues in Jerusalem in the sixties of the
      1st century CE.

      There is also the report of Domitian investigating
      the family later but this is Eusebius using Hegesippus.

      All the same Luke 15.10 is using Mk.61.1 and Fitzmyer
      Luke p.1546f is wisely cautious about the identity
      of 'this "Mary"'.

      David M.




      ---------
      David Mealand, University of Edinburgh


      --
      The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
      Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
    • Richard Fellows
      William Campbell has a very interesting piece in JBL, in which he analyzes the styles of self-designation by Josephus, Polybius and Thucydides. I have reviewed
      Message 42 of 42 , Sep 14, 2010
        William Campbell has a very interesting piece in JBL, in which he
        analyzes the styles of self-designation by Josephus, Polybius and
        Thucydides. I have reviewed his article here:

        http://paulandco-workers.blogspot.com/2010/09/we-passages-thucydides-polybius.html

        I use Campbell's data to argue that the author of Acts was present
        with Paul before the "We passages" as well as during them. Campbell
        himself seems to have overlooked this possibility and comes to a very
        different conclusion.

        Let me know what you think.

        Richard Fellows
        Vancouver


        Kenneth Litwak wrote:

        > I hadn't been following this discussion so I'm sorry to be posting
        > "late." I'd agree with Richard's assessment generally. I need to
        > read Robbins' essay but I'm familiar with MacDonald (I was at an SBL
        > session on Acts where Alexander, MacDonald, and Penner all presented
        > and found MacDonald's thesis far from demonstrated--and open to the
        > same criticisms as raised by Karl Olav Sandnes in his 2005 JBL
        > article on MacDonald's method),
        >
        > It seems to me that "we passages" do not indicate historigraphy
        > or fiction on their own, but I'm not convinced that they affirm
        > nothing about the narrator's participation but could mean either
        > presence or absence.


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