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

Re: [John_Lit] bouncing?

Expand Messages
  • Tom Butler
    Jack, I trust that your test, at least with reference to my e-mail address, proved that you are not bouncing. I wonder about the silence on the J-Lit list.
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 18, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Jack,
      I trust that your test, at least with reference to
      my e-mail address, proved that you are not bouncing.
      I wonder about the silence on the J-Lit list. Are
      we all so busy that discussion of the Gospel has been
      placed on hold or has a different list been created
      where the discussion continues?

      Tom Butler

      --- Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...> wrote:

      >
      > Just testing to see if I am bouncing.
      >
      > JK
      >
      >


      <DIV><STRONG><EM><FONT face=system color=#0000ff>Yours in Christ's service,</FONT></EM></STRONG></DIV>
      <DIV><STRONG><EM><FONT face=System color=#0000ff>Tom Butler</FONT></EM></STRONG></DIV>
    • Frank McCoy
      ... From: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com [mailto:johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tom Butler Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 5:23 PM
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 18, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        -----Original Message-----
        From: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tom Butler
        Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 5:23 PM
        To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [John_Lit] bouncing?

        Jack,
        I trust that your test, at least with reference to my e-mail address,
        proved that you are not bouncing. I wonder about the silence on the
        J-Lit list. Are we all so busy that discussion of the Gospel has been
        placed on hold or has a different list been created where the discussion
        continues?

        Dear Tom Butler:

        Some time ago, I voluntarily withdrew from participating in discussions
        since my knowledge of Greek is inadequate. But, I so deeply share your
        concern about the recent period of silence that I am going to break my
        own silence by making this one contribution, in the hopes that it will
        spark some discussion, and then go back to strictly "lurking".

        THE SAYING ON THE SANCTUARY

        Introduction


        Let us look at John 2:19-22, "Answered Jesus, and said to them (i.e.,
        the Jews), 'Destroy this sanctuary and in three days I will raise it.'
        Said, then, the Jews, 'This sanctuary was built in 46 years-and you will
        raise it in three days?' But that one was speaking about the sanctuary
        of his body. Therefore, when he was raised from the dead, his disciples
        remembered this that he was saying and the believed the scripture and
        the word which Jesus said."



        Note the cryptic reference to "the scripture". Raymond E. Brown
        states, "It is not clear if this is a reference to the OT in general or
        to a particular passage, e.g., Ps. xvi 10, or perhaps to Ps lxix 9 cited
        in vs. 17." <outbind://7/#_ftn1> [1]



        Here, it will be argued, there is another possible candidate for "the
        scripture ": and this is Amos 9:11 , but only as interpreted in the
        fourth stage of its interpretation-with the first two stages having
        taken place in the Qumran community.


        The First Stage in Interpreting Amos 9:11


        Let us look at this excerpt from the Damascus Document, "And all the
        apostates were given up to the sword, but those who held fast escaped to
        the land of the north, as God said, I will exile the tabernacle of your
        king and the bases of your statues from my tent to Damascus (Amos v,
        26-27). The Books of the Law are the tabernacle of the king; as God
        said, I will raise up the tabernacle of David which is fallen (Amos ix,
        11). The king is the congregation; and the bases of the statues are the
        books of the Prophets whose sayings Israel despised. The star is the
        Interpreter of the Law who shall come to Damascus; as it is written, A
        star shall come forth out of Jacob and a scepter shall rise out of
        Israel (Num. xxiv, 17. The scepter is the Prince of the whole
        congregation, and when he comes he shall smite all the children of Seth
        (Num. xxiv, 17)." <outbind://7/#_ftn2> [2]



        Here, Amos 9:11 is strongly linked to Amos 5:26-27.



        Here, Amos 9:11 is also linked to Numbers 24:17-which is interpreted to
        be a prophecy concerning the coming of two End-time figures:

        1. The Interpreter of the Law
        2. The Prince of the congregation

        In interpreting Amos 9:11:

        1. The tabernacle is taken to be the books of the Law, i.e., the
        Torah
        2. David is taken to be the king = the congregation.

        As a result, in this interpretation of Amos 9:11, the tabernacle of
        David is taken to be the Torah of the congregation.



        This is the proposed first stage in the interpreting of Amos 9:11


        The Second Stage in Interpreting Amos 9:11


        The next proposed stage in interpreting Amos 9:11 is found in this
        excerpt from 4Q174, "The lord declares to you that He will build you a
        House (2 Sam. vii, 11C). I will raise up your seed after you (2 Sam.
        vii, 12). I will establish the throne of his kingdom [for ever] (2 Sam.
        vii, 13). [I will be] his father and he shall be my son (2 Sam. vii,
        14). He is the Branch of David who shall arise with the Interpreter of
        the Law [to rule] in Zion [at the end] of time. As it is written, I
        will raise up the tent of David that is fallen (Amos ix, 11). That is
        to say, the fallen tent of David is he who shall arise to save Israel."



        Numbers 24:17, as interpreted in the excerpt from the Damascus Document
        given above, underlies this excerpt from 4Q174. As a result, in this
        excerpt from 4Q174:

        1. The Interpreter of the Law is the star of Numbers 24:17
        2. The Branch of David is the Prince of the congregation mentioned
        in the excerpt from the Damascus Document and he is the scepter of
        Number 24:17.

        This excerpt from 4Q174 begins by citing 2 Samuel 7:11c-13, where God
        speaks through the prophet Nathan to David. It is taken to be a
        prophecy regarding the Branch of David/the Prince of the congregation.
        As a result, it is understood, this Branch of David/the Prince of the
        congregation will be a descendent of David, he will rule forever, and he
        will be, in some meaningful sense, a Son of God.



        In this excerpt from 4Q174, Amos 9:11 is strongly linked to 2 Samuel
        7:11c-13. As a result:

        1. The tent of David is radically re-interpreted to be the Branch
        of David / the Prince of the congregation
        2. The "I" who speaks it is God

        Further, it appears, it is interpreted that the tent of David (i.e.,
        the Branch of David/the Prince of the congregation) will be fallen in
        the sense of having a lowly station in life, but then be raised up by
        God in the sense of being elevated to the status of ruler over Israel by
        God, thereby enabling him to save Israel from her enemies.



        This is the proposed second stage in the interpretation of Amos 9:11.
        <outbind://7/#_ftn3> [3]


        The Third Stage in Interpreting Amos 9:11


        Next, let us turn our attention to Romans 1:3b-4--where Paul states:

        Having come from the seed of David according to flesh; having been
        designated Son of God in power according to a Spirit of holiness out of
        a rising (anastasews) from the dead: Jesus Christ, our Lord.



        What Paul states here readily relates to three of the last four
        scriptural passages cited in the above excerpt from 4Q 174:

        1. The first part of Romans 1:3b-4, "Having come from the seed of
        David according to flesh", relates to the first of these last four
        scriptural passages cited in 4Q174, i.e., 2 Sam. 7:11c, "I will raise up
        your (i.e., David's) seed after you"-for each speaks of an individual
        who will be from the seed of David
        2. The second part of Romans 1:3b-4, "Having been designated Son of
        God in power according to a Spirit of holiness", relates to the second
        of these last four scriptural passages cited in 4Q 174, i.e., 2 Sam.
        7:13, "[I will be] his father and he shall be my son"-for each speaks of
        this individual as being, in some meaningful sense, a Son of God.
        3. The third part of Romans 1:3b-4, "Out of a rising (anastasews)
        from the dead", relates to the fourth of these four scriptural passages
        cited in 4Q174, i.e., Amos 9:11, "I will raise up the tent of David that
        is fallen"-for each refers to the rising/raising up of an individual
        <outbind://7/#_ftn4> [4]

        Note that Romans 1:3b-4 follows the sequential order of scriptural
        passages cited in the excerpt from 4Q174, merely skipping the second of
        these scriptural passages.



        This is a clear indication that Romans 1:3b-4 reflects a familiarity
        with the excerpt from 4Q174 and an approval of its strong linkage of 2
        Sam. 7:11c-13 with Amos 9:11.



        However, there are two quite evident differences in interpretation
        between Romans 1:3b-4 and the excerpt from 4Q174:

        1. In Romans 1:3b-4, the subject of 2 Sam. 7:11c-13 and Amos 9:11
        is taken to be Jesus as Christ and our Lord, but, in the excerpt from
        4Q174, this subject is taken to be the Branch of David / the Prince of
        the congregation
        2. In Romans 1:3b-4, the subject of these two passages is fallen in
        the sense of being slain and rises up in the sense of rising up from the
        dead, but, in the excerpt from 4Q174, this subject is fallen in the
        sense of having a lowly station in life and rises up in the sense of
        being elevated to the lofty status of ruler over Israel.

        As a result, in Romans 1:3b-4, we appear to have a third stage in the
        interpretation of Amos 9:11. In the second stage, the tent/tabernacle
        of David is the Branch of David/Prince of the congregation and this
        figure will be fallen in the sense of having a low status in society
        but, then, be raised by God in the sense of being elevated by God to
        being the King of Israel. However, in this third stage, the
        tent/tabernacle of David is the Christ/Lord and this figure will be
        fallen in the sense of having been killed but, then, be raised by God in
        the sense of being raised from the dead.



        This appears to a pre-Pauline stage in interpretation-for Romans 1:3b-4
        is quite un-Pauline. <outbind://7/#_ftn5> [5] So, it appears, Romans
        1:3b-4 is a pre-Pauline credo that is cited by Paul-presumably because
        the Roman church, to whom he was writing, was already familiar with it
        and accepted its validity.


        The Fourth Stage in Interpreting Amos 9:11


        Next, let us turn our attention to John 2:19-22, which reads, "Answered
        Jesus, and said to them (i.e., the Jews), 'Destroy this sanctuary (naon)
        and in three days I will raise (egerw) it.' Said, then, the Jews, 'This
        sanctuary (naos) was built (oikodomethe) in 46 years-and you will raise
        (egereis) it in three days?' But that one was speaking about the
        sanctuary (naou) of his body. Therefore, when he was raised (egerthe)
        from the dead, his disciples remembered this that he was saying and the
        believed the scripture and the word which Jesus said."



        Here, "the word which Jesus said" is this, "Destroy this sanctuary
        (naon) and in three days I will raise (egerw) it."



        Here, "the scripture" means "the scriptural basis for the word which
        Jesus said".



        As already mentioned, the scriptural passage(s) in mind is/are not
        clear.



        However, there are two considerations that might help us to find a
        primary scriptural passage behind the word of Jesus:

        1. The sanctuary (naos) was the inner part of Herod's temple
        (hieron), the Holy Place accessible only to priests, and it corresponded
        to the wilderness skene (tent or tabernacle).
        2. In the saying by the Jews (i.e., "This sanctuary (naos) was
        built (oikodomethe) in 46 years-and you will raise (egereis) it in three
        days?"), "will raise (egereis) the sanctuary (naos) in three days"
        means, in effect, "will rebuild (anoikodomesw) it in three days."
        <outbind://7/#_ftn6> [6]

        What these two considerations suggest is that the primary scriptural
        passage upon which the "word" of Jesus is based regards not the raising
        of a naos (sanctuary) but, rather, the rebuilding of a skene
        (tent/tabernacle).



        Indeed, there is a scriptural passage which does regard the rebuilding
        of a skene (tent/tabernacle)-and this is Amos 9:11-12 as rendered by
        Luke in Acts 15:16-18 <outbind://7/#_ftn7> [7], "I will rebuild
        (anoikodomesw) the skenen (tent/tabernacle) of David, the one having
        fallen, and the things of it having been torn down I will rebuild
        (anoikodomesw) and I will restore it, so that the ones remaining of men
        might seek out the Lord-and all the Gentiles upon whom my name has been
        invoked over them, says the Lord doing these things-known from the
        ages."



        So, I propose, Amos 9:11-12, as rendered in Acts 15:16-18, is the
        scriptural passage which is the primary basis for the "word" of Jesus,
        i.e., the saying, "Destroy this sanctuary (naon) and in three days I
        will raise (egerw) it."



        In this case, in John 2:19-22, the interpretation of Amos 9:11-12 is
        this:

        1. The Lord doing these things is Jesus and he is, as such, a
        pre-existent divine being "known from the ages"
        2. The skene (tent/tabernacle) of David is the naos (temple) and
        this, in turn, is the body of Jesus
        3. It is fallen in the sense that it has been "destroyed", i.e.,
        slain, by the Jews.
        4. It will be rebuilt in the sense that it will be raised up from
        the dead by the Lord, i.e., Jesus.

        The underlying thought appears to be that Jesus is a pre-existing divine
        being who became incarnate in the skene (tent/tabernacle) of David,
        i.e., in a fleshly body. Further, when his fleshly body was slain, he
        continued to exist and raised it from the dead in three days.



        Compare John 1:14a, "And the Word became flesh and eskenwsen
        (tented/tabernacled) among us." That is to say, the Word, a
        pre-existent divine being, became incarnate in the skene
        (tent/tabernacle) of David, i.e., in a fleshly body.



        So, in John 2:19-22, we appear to have a fourth stage in the
        interpretation of Amos 9:11. In this interpretation of Amos 9:11:

        1. The "I" is Jesus as the Logos
        2. The skene (tent/tabernacle) is the body of Jesus
        3. It is fallen in the sense that it has been slain by the Jews
        4. It will be rebuilt in the sense that it will be restored to
        life-being, thereby, raised up from the dead-by Jesus as the Logos.



        _____


        <outbind://7/#_ftnref1> [1] The Gospel According to John, p.116

        <outbind://7/#_ftnref2> [2] VII

        <outbind://7/#_ftnref3> [3] That the interpretation of Amos 9:11 in the
        excerpt from 4Q174 is later than the one in the excerpt from the
        Damascus Document is indicated by what immediately precedes the excerpt
        from 4Q174. What immediately precedes it reads, "And concerning His
        words to David, And I [will give] you [rest] from all your enemies (2
        Sam. vii, 11), this means that He will give them rest from all the
        children of Belial who cause them to stumble so that they may be
        destroyed [by their errors,] just as they came with a [devilish] plan
        to cause the [sons] of light to stumble and to devise against them a
        wicked plot, so [that they might become subject] to Belial in their
        [wicked] straying."

        Here, "David" is interpreted, as in the Damascus Document's
        interpretation of "the tent of David", to be "the congregation"-the
        members of whom, here, are called the sons of light.

        So, the author of 4Q174 does seem to be familiar with the excerpt from
        the Damascus Document and with how the phrase "the tent of David" is
        interpreted in it. As a result, that his own interpretation of this
        phrase is radically different from the interpretation of it in the
        excerpt from the Damascus Document is an indication that his own
        interpretation of it is later than the interpretation of it to be found
        in the Damascus Document.

        <outbind://7/#_ftnref4> [4] In 4Q174 the "tent of David" that will
        "fall" and then "arise" is identified as being an individual-for it
        contains the statement, "That is to say, the fallen tent of David is he
        who shall arise to save Israel."

        <outbind://7/#_ftnref5> [5] To the best of my knowledge, there is no
        evidence that Paul ever utilized a DSS document in the manner that 4Q174
        appears to have been utilized by the initial author of what we find in
        Romans 1:3b-4. Also, the emphasis of Romans 1:3b-4 on the Davidic
        descent of Jesus is not characteristically Pauline. Finally, it is
        un-Pauline in that no salvific significance is given to the death and
        resurrection of Jesus. As a result, it appears, what we find in Romans
        1:3b-4 is a pre-Pauline credo.

        <outbind://7/#_ftnref6> [6] So, in the Gospel of John (p. 125), Rudolph
        Bultmann freely renders the last part of the "word" of Jesus as, "I will
        (re-) build it in three days!"

        <outbind://7/#_ftnref7> [7] This version of Amos 9:11b significantly
        differs from the Septuagint version of it. Luke attributes its usage to
        a person he calls James and who, in the context, is clearly James, the
        brother of Jesus.


        <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=1164713/grpspId=1705074057/m
        sgId=5484/stime=1163892969>
        Frank McCoy
        1809 N. English Apt. 15
        Maplewood, MN USA 55109



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bob MacDonald
        Frank McCoy All the lists are silent except a few. I think the scholars have gone blogging I have an interest in what you refer to in the temple saying - the
        Message 3 of 4 , Nov 18, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Frank McCoy

          All the lists are silent except a few. I think the scholars have gone
          blogging

          I have an interest in what you refer to in the temple saying - the question
          is simple: how did the first century writers read 'the scripture'?

          Example: the dialogue between the Father and the Son in Hebrews is all taken
          from the Psalter. This 'reading' of the psalms from the first century has
          led me to study them more closely.

          Why did they read them this way when faced with their experience of Jesus in
          the life of Israel? While I am particularly interested in the psalms, John
          has some intriguing readings of Scripture that we have discussed before -
          the 'out of his belly' quote for instance.

          Also some have claimed that the scriptures provided a hypotext against which
          the writers constructed their stories; I don't think I am interested in
          going to that conclusion, but the first century authors knew their
          scriptures better than we do - no TV, no distractions - so why did they use
          them to focus on Jesus and the Spirit as they did?

          This response is tangential to your note - but you did suggest Psalm 16:10
          (I haven't got there in my study yet). The 'Holy One' in this passage is
          hesideka - 'your beloved' - interesting that it is not the tsadiq
          (righteous) or a root related to qodesh (holy) but the root related to mercy
          / loving kindness.

          I will be another 4 years studying the Psalter - my Hebrew is at a
          3-year-old reading level - so it is too early for me to consider this
          question related to a first century writer.

          Bob

          Bob MacDonald
          Victoria BC
          http://gx.ca
          http://bmd.gx.ca
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.