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

Re: [ematthew] The Strong One

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Gurtner
    ... canonical reading ... Sorry to be so vague. What I meant primarily by this was that the questions you asked previously are nearly identical to those
    Message 1 of 13 , Mar 17 11:27 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      >I'm afraid I don't quite follow you on this step. If
      >I understand you
      >correctly - you are proposing what I would call >a
      "canonical" reading
      >to explain Mt. But I see no reason to justify the
      >use of Rev to
      >explain an ambiguous passage in Mt. We can import
      >the Rev passage to
      >make sense of Mt - but I see no evidence within Mt
      >that would justify
      >this move. I see no reason to posit literary or even
      >any traditions
      >connections between Mt and Rev. Rev seems to orbit
      >in a more
      >Johannine universe.
      Sorry to be so vague. What I meant primarily by this
      was that the questions you asked previously are nearly
      identical to those raised for the Rev 20 text. They
      tend to be more comprehensively discussed there.


      >Simply sharing a apocalyptic approach does not mean
      >that metaphors
      >will signify the same things. Mt and Rev use
      >language very
      >differently and so attempting to understand one by
      >the other I think
      >will tend to suggest false comparisons.
      Excellent point, and I�m with you to a degree. We
      must let Matthew be Matthew and look to him primarily
      for his own understanding of the pericope. Thus we
      look at themes, language, OT allusions, etc. I agree
      that just because they share a similar portion of
      genre (if we can call apocalyptic that) and canonical
      status can lead to, as you say, �false comparisons�.
      (I must add this applies not just to using Revelation
      in Matthew, but also Mark in Matthew � a method too
      often used in my opinion).

      While I do recognize validity in a �canonical� reading
      I have more in mind what I consider an �intertextual�
      reading. That is, there are texts in the Assumption of
      Moses, T. Levi and Rev which are quite similar to the
      Matthean texts. While one must examine each of these
      texts and contexts in detail before one can discern
      what, if any, comparisons can be made, I think that
      the fact that the issue of the binding of Satan is one
      so rarely attested in either Jewish or Christian
      sources from antiquity some degree of consultation is
      in order. Moreover, if you examine the Matthean text
      without regard to Rev whatsoever, you run the risk of
      assuming Matthew wrote in a theological vacuum when it
      is more likely that he wrote within an evolving
      Christian tradition. Again, their uses of the concept
      may differ but to write off the Rev text off hand
      because it is a different work than Matthew may
      equally lead to a distortion. That being said, I must
      confess a great deal of ignorance on apocalypticism in
      Matthew so my ability to comment on it vis-�-vis
      Revelation is quite limited.

      I do want to ask, however, what you mean by �Rev seems
      to orbit in a more Johannine universe�?


      Daniel M. Gurtner
      St. Mary�s College
      University of St. Andrews, Scotland


      __________________________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
      http://platinum.yahoo.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.