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

Re: [XTalk] The parabolic jolt re: Parable of the Sower

Expand Messages
  • Karel Hanhart
    ... Reply: We don t know, of course, what Jesus may have said in Aramaic or Hebrew. Both Delitsch and Lindsey, in their attempt to translate Mark back into
    Message 1 of 34 , Jul 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Jan Sammer wrote:

      > From: "Karel Hanhart" <K.Hanhart@...>
      >
      > > A hundredfold harvest occurs just once
      > > in the Hebrew Bible, namely Gn 26,12 : Isaac sowed in that land, [of the
      > > Philistines] and reaped that same year a hundredfold.. As a 'hapax' it may
      > well be
      > > that the 100 fold harvest in Mark refers to the yield of seed, sown in the
      > > diaspora among the Gentiles. Matthew's reversal may caution the reader
      > about the
      > > quality of that harvest. I am not sure if the combination reap and
      > hundredfold is
      > > a hapax; it would take some time to check. Any response?
      > >
      > The problem with this interpretation is that neither GMark nor GMatthew, nor
      > GLuke literally state "hundredfold" nor do they use the Greek equivalent of
      > "reap". This is an interpretation of the translator which, albeit not
      > impossible, goes beyond what the text actually states.

      Reply:

      We don't know, of course, what Jesus may have said in Aramaic or Hebrew. Both
      Delitsch and Lindsey, in their attempt to translate Mark back into Hebrew, simply
      have the Hebrew number for 'one hundred' [meah] in 4,8. As Mark did not compose
      the parable himself, he chose the simple Greek word 'hekaton', hence not hundred
      fold.. I seems to me that you underestimate the fact that the verse in Genesis is
      a "hapax". If a word or expression occurs just once in Tenach, this is an
      important midrashic signal. Mark may well have deliberately altered the original
      Hebrew (Aramaic) version of Jesus' parable slightly to bring out the truth I
      suggested above. It would explain the odd 'one hundred' in this series as well as
      Matthew's reversal.

      yours cordially,
      Karel Hanhart K.Hanhart@...
    • David C. Hindley
      ... seeds.
      Message 34 of 34 , Jul 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        William said:

        >>I don't follow what is meant by a 2-5x return on planting grain
        seeds.<<

        In ancient times, and even recently in regions where subsistence
        (i.e., relatively unmechanized) farming is common, the yield is not
        represented as volume of grain but by the volume of grain returned
        divided by the volume of grain sown. If you sow a bushel of wheat
        (using modern US measure), you expect (maybe pray for) 5 bushels
        reaped. The yield seems to have varied between 4x and 6x, according to
        the Turkish study (circa 1950, and using relatively primitive farming
        techniques resembling that of 1st century Palestine) mentioned in an
        earlier post.

        Respectfully,

        Dave Hindley
        Cleveland, Ohio, USA
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.