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

Re: [XTalk] Re: Married Jesus

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
    ... A larger and , I think, more pertinent question, is what was regarded in the first century CE as a forbidden marriage . What ever it might have meant when
    Message 1 of 36 , Apr 23, 2002
      mwgrondin wrote:

      > > Bob Webb asked,
      > > 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.
      >

      A larger and , I think, more pertinent question, is what was regarded in
      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"

      Yours,

      Jeffrey Gibson

      --
      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
      1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
      Floor 1
      Chicago, Illinois 60626
      e-mail jgibson000@...
      jgibson000@...



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Antonio Jerez
      An interesting message from Ken Olson ... Some years ago me, Mark Goodacre, Mahlon Smith and a few other participants had a very prolonged discussion where
      Message 36 of 36 , Feb 2, 2003
        An interesting message from Ken Olson

        > Luke says that "many" (POLLOI) "orderly accounts" or "narratives arranged in
        > 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.

        Some years ago me, Mark Goodacre, Mahlon Smith and a few other participants had a
        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.

        Best wishes

        Antonio Jerez
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.