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

heart

Expand Messages
  • diadem
    To Jeffery Hodges. I wonder whether you have read The NT World by Bruce Malina? His chapter on The First Century Personality: The Individual and the Group
    Message 1 of 5 , May 9, 2001
      To Jeffery Hodges.
      I wonder whether you have read 'The NT World' by Bruce Malina? His
      chapter on 'The First Century Personality: The Individual and the Group'
      has a fascinating section on the way people of Jesus' day viewed
      themselves and their own 'psychology'. I think you would find the
      section on 'eyes-heart' quite revealing.
      Also there's 'Biblical Social Values and Their Meanings' by Pilch &
      Malina. The entry under 'eyes-heart' may be of great help in getting at
      how the people in the text of the Bible and those first readers
      understood the words in the text. Is that not a good starting point for
      your project?
      Ross Saunders from DownUnder
    • Bob MacDonald
      What is the generally accepted opinion on who is intended as the antecedent for OUTOS in verse 24 this is the disciple who... wrote these things ? (Peter, the
      Message 2 of 5 , May 10, 2001
        What is the generally accepted opinion on who is intended as the antecedent
        for OUTOS in verse 24 'this is the disciple who... wrote these things'?
        (Peter, the unknown author, the Beloved Disciple, someone named John?)

        Thanks

        Bob

        mailto::BobMacDonald@...
        + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

        Catch the foxes for us,
        the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
        for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
        http://members.home.net/bobmacdonald/homepage.htm
      • Horace Jeffery Hodges
        I think that there would be little disagreement on this listserve that our discussion-schedule aims have not been met as we had wished. There was no real
        Message 3 of 5 , May 11, 2001
          I think that there would be little disagreement on
          this listserve that our discussion-schedule aims have
          not been met as we had wished. There was no real
          discussion of Paul Anderson's paper on the Paraclete
          and little discussion of the last several papers --
          including Elizabeth Danna's paper and my own two
          papers on the dualism of food in John.

          Only the first few papers received an adequate
          discussion.

          Doubtless, many reasons could be advanced to explain
          this decline in the number of participants in the
          discussions and in the intensity of the discussions,
          and I won't hazard any guesses about what these
          reasons might be, but I will emphasize that the
          decline has nothing to do with any decline in the
          quality of the later papers. (Yes, I realize that this
          is a self-interested remark.)

          I think that we need to think about how to reform any
          future discussions of papers in order to better meet
          our aims. I have one suggestion that, if agreed upon
          and adhered to, would radically transform future
          discussions. Here is my proposal:

          In future discussions, everyone who posts a paper for
          discussion must formally agree to read and comment
          upon all other papers posted for discussion within a
          specified and agreed upon time frame.

          This seems eminently fair to me (or I wouldn't be
          proposing it), but I would like to know what others
          think.

          Jeffery Hodges

          =====
          Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
          Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
          447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
          Yangsandong 411
          South Korea

          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
          http://auctions.yahoo.com/
        • jestaton@zoom.co.uk
          ... antecedent ... things ? ... John?) ... I think the Beloved Disciple (whoever he/she may be!), who is also the subject of verse 23. Best Wishes JOHN E
          Message 4 of 5 , May 11, 2001
            --- In johannine_literature@y..., "Bob MacDonald" <bobmacdonald@h...>
            wrote:
            > What is the generally accepted opinion on who is intended as the
            antecedent
            > for OUTOS in verse 24 'this is the disciple who... wrote these
            things'?
            > (Peter, the unknown author, the Beloved Disciple, someone named
            John?)
            >
            > Thanks
            >
            > Bob

            I think the Beloved Disciple (whoever he/she may be!), who is also
            the subject of verse 23.

            Best Wishes

            JOHN E STATON
            www.jestaton.org
            jestaton@...
          • jestaton@zoom.co.uk
            For my own part, Jeffrey, pressure of work has prevented me reading these estimable papers, and I will not insult the authors by commenting on work I have not
            Message 5 of 5 , May 11, 2001
              For my own part, Jeffrey, pressure of work has prevented me reading
              these estimable papers, and I will not insult the authors by
              commenting on work I have not read. I have downloaded the papers, and
              will read them when time permits.

              Best Wishes

              JOHN E STATON
              --- In johannine_literature@y..., Horace Jeffery Hodges
              <jefferyhodges@y...> wrote:
              > I think that there would be little disagreement on
              > this listserve that our discussion-schedule aims have
              > not been met as we had wished. There was no real
              > discussion of Paul Anderson's paper on the Paraclete
              > and little discussion of the last several papers --
              > including Elizabeth Danna's paper and my own two
              > papers on the dualism of food in John.
              >
              > Only the first few papers received an adequate
              > discussion.
              >
              > Doubtless, many reasons could be advanced to explain
              > this decline in the number of participants in the
              > discussions and in the intensity of the discussions,
              > and I won't hazard any guesses about what these
              > reasons might be, but I will emphasize that the
              > decline has nothing to do with any decline in the
              > quality of the later papers. (Yes, I realize that this
              > is a self-interested remark.)
              >
              > I think that we need to think about how to reform any
              > future discussions of papers in order to better meet
              > our aims. I have one suggestion that, if agreed upon
              > and adhered to, would radically transform future
              > discussions. Here is my proposal:
              >
              > In future discussions, everyone who posts a paper for
              > discussion must formally agree to read and comment
              > upon all other papers posted for discussion within a
              > specified and agreed upon time frame.
              >
              > This seems eminently fair to me (or I wouldn't be
              > proposing it), but I would like to know what others
              > think.
              >
              > Jeffery Hodges
              >
              > =====
              > Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
              > Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
              > 447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
              > Yangsandong 411
              > South Korea
              >
              > __________________________________________________
              > Do You Yahoo!?
              > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
              > http://auctions.yahoo.com/
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.