Re: [XTalk] Re: Married Jesus
- mwgrondin wrote:
> > Bob Webb asked,A larger and , I think, more pertinent question, is what was regarded in
> > What evidence would you bring to support the claim
> > that "because of his adulterous birth he could not marry"?
> --- Sakari Häkkinen wrote:
> > ... my evidence comes from the Torah:
> > Dtn 23:3: "No-one born of a forbidden marriage* nor any of his
> > descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, even down to the
> > tenth generation."
> > (NIV, which adds the comment on *: "Or [one of illegitimate
> > birth]"). Those born of a forbidden marriage [or those of
> > illegitimate birth] are outsiders like Eunuchs (Dtn 23:2),
> > Ammonites and Moabites or their descendants (Dtn 23:4).
> Being outsiders forbidden to enter the assembly and being able to
> marry are two different things. A "forbidden marriage" in the eyes
> of Deuteronomy is a marriage still. Outsiders could obviously marry
> each other.
the first century CE as a "forbidden marriage". What ever it might have
meant when Deut. was composed (and is there any evidence it meant
marriage to someone who was illegitimate?), it might have taken on a
whole 'nother significance by Jesus time. Witness the evolution
displayed in, for example, the Mishnah of what constitutes Deut. 24's
grounds of divorce (finding something "unseemly" in a woman) from
(apparently) adultery or some sexual aberration to "less pretty" than
another woman or "unskilled in the kitchen"
Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60626
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- An interesting message from Ken Olson
> Luke says that "many" (POLLOI) "orderly accounts" or "narratives arranged inSome years ago me, Mark Goodacre, Mahlon Smith and a few other participants had a
> order" (ANATAXASQAI DIHGHSIN) have already been written. While the word
> "undertaken" (EPECEIRHSAN) may suggest that he considers these accounts less
> than satisfactory for some reason, the fact that he says that he "too"
> (KAMOI) has written one would seem to indicate that their works were of the
> same genre as his own.
very prolonged discussion where Mark and me argued along exactly these lines. I still believe'
that Lukes own words in his prologue together with the indications in his text makes it almost certain
that he knew both GMark and GMatthew.