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

[XTalk] Re: [Xtalk] HJ through Gentile eyes

Expand Messages
  • Stevan Davies
    ... To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 15, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      > From: Antonio Jerez <antonio.jerez@...>

      > Jon Peter has already tried to answer this and I think he made some
      > good points. I can add that we know another Jewish sect contemporaneus
      > with early Christianity that hurled vitriolic invectives at other Jews not
      > belonging to their form of Judaism - the Qumran Community. I do recall
      > that there are passages in the DSS were the members are called to
      > hate other Jews. At the other end of the spectrum we have the Christians
      > who were asked by the Matthean and Lukan Jesus to love their enemies.

      And, of course, Matthew hurls vitriolic invective at other Jews in
      23, portions of which are also to be found in Lk hence Q.

      > So the level of invective against Jews is hardly a good way of
      > finding out if a firstcentury text is written by a gentile or a
      fellow Jew.

      This is quite a good point. Perhaps the difference will be whether
      what is being attacked is "being a Jew" or "Judaism," which
      is what one would expect from Gentiles or "being a Jew of
      the wrong sort, or understanding Judaism improperly, or
      failing to understand what Judaism should really be" which
      is what one would expect from Jews. Even in John, where
      "the Jews" are the problem, the Gospel presupposes the
      excellence of some sort of Judaism and appeals to the Torah
      and shows Jesus as a Jew going to Temple in a generally
      but not universally positive way... where being expelled from the
      synagogue is regretted and not a cause for rejoicing.

      Do you, or anyone else, know of instances of any kind where
      Jews violently (as opposed to verbally) persecuted Jews for
      their beliefs? Lewis Reich?

      Steve

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com
      To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
    • Bernard Muller
      ... To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 15, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        > Jeffrey B. Gibson wrote:

        > > Bernard wrote:
        > > Paul's turf is visited by "superlative" and "false" apostles,
        > > Apollos (mister O.T.), very likely Peter (for Corinth), Judaizers,
        > > Jewish Christians.
        > > The competition is fierce (Ref.: Paul's Corinthians, Philippians,
        > > Galatians and Romans). Pauline Christianity becomes defensive.
        > > It had to adopt part of Judaism. So the influence on the "Gentile"
        > > gospels. GMatthew is basically Jewish Christian and "Q", for a large
        > > part, is the same; so no surprise here.
        > >
        > Bernard,
        >
        > Do you think you'd be able to make these assertion if you were using
        > only Paul's letters for the outline of the chronology of his ministry
        > and confrontation with opponents and not relying -- as you do here --
        > on the Luke's portrayal of the number and course of Paul's missionary
        > journeys? It seems to me that you assume what needs to be proven,
        > namely, that Luke is more trustworthy on these matters than Paul.
        >
        > [snip]

        Jeffrey, I was referring to Paul's letters as the record shows. I agree
        with you on the last point: on historical matters, Paul's letters are
        more trustworthy that Acts.

        > >
        > > Acts and Galatians agree that Paul's relation with the "pillars"
        > > were ice cold. I think the relation was as such: collect money
        > > for us among your Gentiles and we reluctantly will not pull out
        > > the carpet from underneath you (Gal2:2&10 and more about money
        > > collections for the "poor" of Jerusalem in 1&2Corinthians, Romans
        > > and Acts).


        > I'd be grateful if you'd look at Acts 15:4 and Gal 2:9, especially
        > this latter verses use of the expression "right hand of fellowship",
        > and then explain to me how you can claim that Paul's relations with
        > the pillars was ice cold. Further, could I have some exegesis of
        > Gal 2:2, 10 that shows that there was any kind of "reluctance" on
        > the part of James and Peter with regard to their granting Paul a
        > mission field?

        I do not want to be as selective as you are, but rather look at the
        bigger picture, which would include:
        Gal2:6 "As for those who seemed to be important [among the Church of
        Jerusalem]--whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not
        judge by external appearance--those men added nothing to my message."
        We are not talking about warm togetherness. Paul is keeping his distance
        and does not accept any leadership from them.

        Gal2:9b-10 "They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to
        the Jews. All they asked was that we should continue to remember the
        poor [of the Church of Jerusalem], the very thing I was eager to do."

        I notice they agree but do not propose. And their acceptance may have a
        lot to do with the last verse. I concede that in Gal2:7-9a Paul put a
        good spin on his meeting with the "pillars" but let's see what happen
        next in Antioch:
        Gal2:11-14 "When Peter came to Antioch, **I opposed him to his face**,
        because he was clearly in the wrong. Before certain men came from James,
        he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to
        draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid
        of those who belonged to the circumcision group. The other Jews joined
        him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led
        astray.
        When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the
        gospel, **I said to Peter in front of them all**, "You are a Jew, yet
        you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you
        force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?"
        We are beyond an ice cold relationship here, it's a feud, almost war.

        Bernard
        http://www.concentric.net/~Mullerb/

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com
        To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com
        To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
      • BobSchacht@aol.com
        In a message dated 99-06-15 23:15:28 EDT, miser17@epix.net writes:
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 17, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 99-06-15 23:15:28 EDT, miser17@... writes:

          <<
          Do you, or anyone else, know of instances of any kind where
          Jews violently (as opposed to verbally) persecuted Jews for
          their beliefs? Lewis Reich? >>

          I think Josephus could be read this way. Of course, the important clause in
          your question is "for their beliefs" and you might want to make the case that
          the numerous examples of Pharisees killing sadducees (or was it v v.?) was
          political rather than a matter of beliefs. But then, your framing of the
          question is particularly Christian(!) in perspective, rather than Jewish,
          because it is framed in terms of making "beliefs" the important issue. At
          least, one must be wary if the statement of the question is relevant to the
          times.

          Bob

          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com
          To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com
          To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
        • Hmanhoff@aol.com
          Quick note 2.If looking at the Gospels as a document by Jews, for Jews written about a Jew, consider this. The people that we identify as Jews in the first
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 18, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            Quick note 2.

            If looking at the Gospels as a document by Jews, for Jews written about a
            Jew, consider this. The people that we identify as Jews in the first
            centuries did not identify themselves as "Jews", but as "Israel". [The
            Mishna never refers to a "Yehudi" but "Yisrael".] To the Galilean followers
            of Jesus, the bad guys were the Judeans associated with the power elite of
            the Jerusalem Temple and Roman rule. Most of the inventives of the Gospels
            against the "Jews" would be better understood as being against a corrupt
            priesthood, and ruling elite in league with the Romans. Since most
            messianism was directed at removing Roman rule, I can't imagine that the
            Judeans cared much for the "unwashed masses" of the Galilee, especially when
            their leaders came armed to Jerusalem.

            Harry A. Manhoff
            UCSB - ABD

            ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com
            To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com
            To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
          • Antonio Jerez
            Harry Manhoff wrote:Quick note 2. If looking at the Gospels as a document by Jews, for Jews written about a Jew, consider this. The people that we
            Message 5 of 6 , Jun 20, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              Harry Manhoff wrote:

              > Quick note 2.
              >
              > If looking at the Gospels as a document by Jews, for Jews written about a
              > Jew, consider this. The people that we identify as Jews in the first
              > centuries did not identify themselves as "Jews", but as "Israel". [The
              > Mishna never refers to a "Yehudi" but "Yisrael".] To the Galilean followers
              > of Jesus, the bad guys were the Judeans associated with the power elite of
              > the Jerusalem Temple and Roman rule. Most of the inventives of the Gospels
              > against the "Jews" would be better understood as being against a corrupt
              > priesthood, and ruling elite in league with the Romans. Since most
              > messianism was directed at removing Roman rule, I can't imagine that the
              > Judeans cared much for the "unwashed masses" of the Galilee, especially when
              > their leaders came armed to Jerusalem.

              I don't know if I am misunderstanding you, but are you claiming
              that the gospels were not written by Jews (or former Jews who
              "converted" to Christianity? I am also doubtful about your claim
              that Jews in the first century did not identify themselves as Jews.
              I have noticed that a lot of confusion sorrounds the term Ioudaioi.
              The problem is that Ioudaioi could mean BOTH a Jew (= a person who
              is a follower of the Mosaic religion) and a Judean (= a Jew who comes
              from Judea). It is quite obvious in Paul's letters that Paul mostly (or
              always) talked about Ioudaioi in the first sense.

              Best wishes

              Antonio Jerez


              ------------------------------------------------------------------------
              To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com
              To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com
              To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
            • Hmanhoff@aol.com
              In a message dated 6/20/99 10:29:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time, antonio.jerez@privat.utfors.se writes:
              Message 6 of 6 , Jun 20, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                In a message dated 6/20/99 10:29:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
                antonio.jerez@... writes:

                << I don't know if I am misunderstanding you, but are you claiming
                that the gospels were not written by Jews (or former Jews who
                "converted" to Christianity?

                No, I said that the gospels were written by Torah committed members of the
                Covenant of Abraham, for other similarly committed people, mainly Galileans,
                who were poor, relatively uneducated, and in relation to the Judeans,
                culturally unsofisticated. The followers of Jesus, best called the Jesus
                movement, were committed to the Torah, and were committed to a Torahitic
                concept of messiah.

                <>

                Paul was also being hounded by the Jerusalem leadership of the movement.
                Obviously he had a bone to pick with the Judeans, including those in the
                Jesus movement.

                Just some thoughts of a lowly grad student.

                Harry A. Manhoff
                UCSB - ABD

                ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com
                To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                To contact list managers, e-mail us at: crosstalk2-owners@egroups.com
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.