10775RE: [GTh] GTh and the parable of the banquet
- Jan 13, 2014
I agree that when we have a good hammer, it is very tempting to treat everything like a nail. I also agree that it is good to ask about the method of composition of a text, and I think that the parable of the banquet shows signs of several people or groups of people having had a go at it. Mark Goodacre also notes that the way that Thomas is put together suggests that its author is not as good a story-teller as are the authors of the synoptics – and maybe this is because it has been worked over by a committee or community?
Humanities and Social Sciences
University of New England
ARMIDALE NSW 2351
> Am I being too literalist in thinking that there might be
> some significance in the fact that the GTh host has initially
> invited strangers to his meal?
In my view YES.
If we are very good with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Why do we assume that writers are rigorous in their choice of words? Certainly I am not and most people are not. Why do we ignore the sense of the paragraph and move directly to a microscopic analysis of what the words mean? Why do we think that every text was composed with deep thought and insite typical of a Teutonic theology school? Why do we think an author composed in a single session, not setting it aside partially complete, and not changing his mind in the interim? Why do we think an author composed a work alone? Why is it not a product of discussion and compromise?
In fact do we really know what words commonly is the precise community that author was part of? I am thinking of the English word "gay". In my youth it had one meaning. Today common usage has another usage while people my daughter's age use it to mean "weird".
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>