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

[XTalk] Re: Prophecy Historicized

Expand Messages
  • matt_estrada@yahoo.com
    As a matter of fact, Jeffrey, I have read Dodd s little book on the old in the new. But I still believe that finding the old in the new is not as simple as you
    Message 1 of 36 , Jun 28, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      As a matter of fact, Jeffrey, I have read Dodd's little book on the
      old in the new. But I still believe that finding the old in the new
      is not as simple as you would have us to believe, for if it were,
      then we would be much more in agreement on the genre of the gospels.
      It is a difficult task to discern NT allusions made to OT stories
      when they are cited by the NT authors. Indeed, even to know when an
      allusion has occurred can throw the best of us off track.
      You continue to state "how narrow the OT field mined by NT authors
      actually was" and state that this "has not been fundamentally
      disputed". I continue to disagree with you. I think it has been
      argued (whether or not successfully depends on which camp you reside
      in) how the majority of the gospel stories are re-tellings of the OT
      in the light of Jesus Christ, re-tellings that draw from a myriad of
      OT source material. Much of the source material that comes from the
      OT has not yet been uncovered. So how can you limit the NT writers
      sources when you don't even know what they are yet?


      --- In crosstalk2@y..., "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000@h...> wrote:
      > Matthew Estrada wrote:
      >
      > > Jeffrey stated:
      > > "I wonder how much you are taking into account C.H.
      > > Dodd's work on (a) the fact that the OT texts that are
      > > alluded to in the Gospels as well as throughout the NT
      > > are, quite contrary to what we might expect given
      > > certain models of how and why the OT was used in the
      > > NT, come only from a fairly narrow set of texts
      > > and(b) that there seems to have been in operation a
      > > well established criteria for viewing which OT texts
      > > were or were not appropriate as passages to which NT
      > > authors might appeal in any kind of "fulfillment
      > > scheme"?"
      > >
      > > I guess I believe that we've only just begun to
      > > uncover the method and the texts that the NT writers
      > > used in applying OT passages to Christ, therefore a)to
      > > say that the OT texts that are alluded to in the NT
      > > come from a fairly narrow set of texts seems
      > > premature, doesn't it? This, in turn, prevents us from
      > > b) recognizing, at this point, any established
      > > criteria that the early church might have used for
      > > viewing which OT texts were or were not appropiate for
      > > their fulfillment scheme.
      > >
      >
      > Why you think identifying OT texts quoted or alluded to in the NT
      is a
      > new, let alone a difficult task, is beyond me. In any case, I
      would
      > urge you to read Dodd's little work, _The Old Testament in the New_
      > (with which, I take it, you are not familiar) as well as his
      _According
      > to the Scriptures_ to see how he went about identifying what he
      came to
      > call "the substratum of NT theology". So far as I know, his
      conclusions
      > about what OT texts are to be found in the NT, as well as how
      narrow the
      > OT field mined by NT authors actually was (Dodd's work was carried
      out
      > in opposition to the idea of "testimony books" made popular by R.
      > Harris) has not been fundamentally disputed.
      >
      > You might also want to have a look at Barnabas Lindars' _New
      Testament
      > Apologetic_.
      >
      > Yours,
      >
      > Jeffrey
      > --
      > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
      > 7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
      > Chicago, Illinois 60626
      > e-mail jgibson000@h...
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mark Goodacre
      ... Thanks for making me smile. I deny all responsibility for the ugliness of that face; and as the programme pointed out, I was asked in to give it a
      Message 36 of 36 , Jul 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        On 28 Jun 2001, at 22:34, Ken Olson wrote:

        > OK, Mark, I have to ask: when you were consulted on that Jesus image
        > [still available at
        > http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-105319,00.html%5d were you
        > assuming that Tertullian wasn't just historicizing Isaiah 53 but that
        > there must be some historical kernel to Tertullian's claim that Jesus
        > was ugly? (;[See _On the Flesh of Christ_, 9.136-139; available online
        > at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf03-39.htm#P9237_2537879%5d

        Thanks for making me smile. I deny all responsibility for the
        ugliness of that face; and as the programme pointed out, I was
        asked in to "give it a make-over".

        Thanks for the other useful comments on this thread -- I'll come
        back to them soon.

        Mark
        -----------------------------
        Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
        Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512
        University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 6866
        Birmingham B15 2TT
        United Kingdom

        http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
        Homepage
        http://NTGateway.com
        The New Testament Gateway
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.