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

Re: [XTalk] The Jesus movement before the NT

Expand Messages
  • Ronald Price
    JK: -- ..... If you date 4G to 105 CE you are claiming p52 an autograph or 1st generation copy. I place P52 s paleographic mean at 117 CE. I claim, after many
    Message 1 of 73 , Dec 5, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      JK: -->
      ..... If you date 4G to 105 CE you are claiming p52 an autograph or 1st
      generation copy. I place P52's paleographic mean at 117 CE. I claim, after
      many years of work and study, canonical 4G was written in the latter rule of
      Domitian (95ish CE) in Greek but using as a template (much as Matthew and
      Luke used Mark) an early Aramaic narrative in translational Greek. This
      "proto-John" is still embedded in the larger Greek opus. Proto-John
      pre-dated Mark and as early as the 40's CE.

      RP: -->
      My investigations indicate that John had no contemporary written sources
      other than the synoptic gospels. I observe that the popular early date for
      p52 has been challenged by A.Schmidt (see Schnelle's NT introduction, p.477,
      n.119), who dates it at 170 CE +- 25 years. See also the following article
      in Wikipedia:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rylands_Library_Papyrus_P52

      - - - - - - - - - -

      JK: -->
      John Mark (if he was the
      author) would never had "dissed" Ya'qub haTsaddiqa because he WAS Jesus'
      brother as well as having been one of the more revered pious men of the
      time .....

      RP: -->
      It seems you're not a fan of the story of Robin Hood, which features a good
      king and his treacherous brother. ;-(
      Of course it's largely mythical, but its characterization of brothers at
      loggerheads, where one is loved and the other hated, is surely quite
      plausible.

      - - - - - - - - - -

      JK: -->
      I NEVER rely on the
      Greek for a narrative or a saying of Jesus that was originally rendered, or
      written, in Judean Aramaic.

      RP: -->
      Very laudable. However this principle cannot be applicable when
      investigating possible confusion within the Greek tradition, as I was trying
      to do.

      - - - - - - - - - -

      JK: -->
      ....unless or until I get to the UK again and you can put
      on the coffee and clear your schedule.

      RP: -->

      If you do, then be assured that coffee is available in our bungalow, and my
      schedule is very flexible!

      Ron Price,

      Derbyshire, UK

      http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • David Mealand
      This topic ran for a while back in January. I have just seen a review of a book on Philo which gives particular attention to Philo s use of some passages from
      Message 73 of 73 , Feb 16, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        This topic ran for a while back in January.

        I have just seen a review of a book on Philo
        which gives particular attention to Philo's
        use of some passages from the haftarot which, it is
        argued, match part of a later cycle of such readings.
        Naomi Cohen, Philo's Scriptures ... (Brill 2007) is
        the book, and a very interesting and detailed review
        of it by Tzvee Zahavy is in Review of Rabbinic
        Judaism 15 (2012) 133-136.

        David M.







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


        --
        The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
        Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.