10726RE: [GTh] Re: New Op-ed Piece on my Site
- Nov 22 1:31 PM
I suspect that Ian is saying that he doesn’t care what Jesus was trying to convey precisely because he is interested in what the human author is representing Jesus as having said. J
I think that trying to get back to the original/actual words of Jesus by using the texts that we have is a hopeless task unless you are prepared to believe that God somehow worked to guarantee that what Jesus said was recorded accurately. All we have is what people remembered him as saying and passed on to others – a method of recording that is subject to all sorts of changes.
Humanities and Social Sciences
University of New England
ARMIDALE NSW 2351
I am the one who cares "what Jesus was trying to convey"or more specifically what the human author was trying to convey and does this agree with the presumed oral tradition of the presumed period the text was authored.
It is my opinion that any other intrepretation than the tennants being evil is incompatible with the oral tradition expressed in Mark, essentially dating Thomas rather late.
Points well taken, Mike. I was merely cautioning us not to use "evil" as opposed to good given that no one reconstructs the lacuna to read "evil".
Was the land owner looked at negatively? Yes, was he evil? No
I'm also unclear why you seem to think I was concerned about "what Jesus was trying to convey". I really don't care what Jesus was trying to convey, and if I wasn't clear about that, apologies.
BUT, this was an aside to my more important suggestion to look at documentary papyri for evidence of XRHSTHS being used to describe creditors. If you're going to pursue this line of argument I would HIGHLY recommend checking the docpap out.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>