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

Re: Malachi 3:8-12

Expand Messages
  • Fr. Thomas Moore
    Ought to know better than joke around with scholars. I was simply teasing with the kind of proof texting I find so prevalent in the bible belt where I live.
    Message 1 of 39 , Nov 17, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Ought to know better than joke around with scholars.

      I was simply teasing with the kind of "proof texting" I find so prevalent in
      the bible belt where I live.

      Sorry, back to lurking, and thanks for you scholarship here.

      Fr. Thomas





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Bill Ross
      The first two words of the LXX and of John 1:1 are identical, and to my thinking, form a striking allusion - not only by the word choice but the word order -
      Message 39 of 39 , Nov 30, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        The first two words of the LXX and of John 1:1 are identical, and to my
        thinking, form a striking allusion - not only by the word choice but the
        word order - first in the entire scroll. There seems to be no question that
        the "beginning" referred to in John 1 is not "in eternity past" as is often
        suggested but rather Genesis 1.

        Further, the suggestion that Philo's musings about LOGOS serve as the
        backdrop for this passage are unnecessary. Clearly the LOGOS in view is none
        but the "let there be" of Genesis 1.

        The LXX background completely illuminates the text, rescuing it from the
        gross misinterpretations it is usually subjected to.

        Bill Ross
        http://bibleshockers.com
        Bible Shockers! A collection of disturbing observations of and about the
        Bible.



        --------------------------------------------------
        From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@...>
        Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 5:41 AM
        To: <lxx@yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: Re: [lxx] Re: Why NT topics on LXX?

        >
        > On Nov 29, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Chris Weimer wrote:
        >
        >> The New Testament makes use of the Septuagint. As long as the
        >> questions are directly relevant to the LXX, I personally see no harm.
        >> Within reason, no?
        >>
        > I've no problem with that; where the text of the LXX can illuminate
        > questions raised in a NT text, that's fine -- but the lengthy thread on
        > John 1:1 seemed to me to have a very tenuous or tangential
        > relationship to the LXX at best and to be sustained not by light
        > thrown by the LXX on questions about the LOGOS, but by the
        > never-ending fascination with the text of John 1:1 itself.
        >>
        >> Chris Weimer
        >>
        >> --- In lxx@yahoogroups.com, "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad@...> wrote:
        >> >
        >> > Why is so much of the discussion on this LXX list focused on matters
        >> > that relate to the GNT and not to the LXX? Isn't there any oversight
        >> > of this forum?
        >> >
        >> > Carl W. Conrad
        >> > Department of Classics, Washington University (Ret)
        >>
        >
        > Carl W. Conrad
        > Department of Classics, Washington University (Ret)
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.