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

Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Some Inaccuracies in Tischendorf's Notes

Expand Messages
  • dwashbur@nyx.net
    ... [snip] First, thanks to George for all the references. Second, I do have a problem with some of the methods of late-dating Luke-Acts. It doesn t seem
    Message 1 of 38 , Sep 6, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      On 6 Sep 2011 at 10:39, George F Somsel wrote:

      >
      >
      >
      > James Snapp Jr wrote: "Is that actually your view. Just out of
      > curiosity: what do you see as the
      > composition-date of the Gospel of Luke?"
      > Plummer in his ICC commentary on Luke notes: "The main theories
      > respecting the date of the
      > Third Gospel contend respectively for a time in or near the years
      > a.d. 100, a.d. 80, and a.d. 63"
      > while discounting arguments that Luke was dependent on Josephus.

      [snip]

      First, thanks to George for all the references. Second, I do have a problem with some of the
      methods of late-dating Luke-Acts. It doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that the gospel
      was written first, as it seems to be referenced in the prologue of Acts, so the date of Acts
      would seem to provide a terminus in that regard. The biggest problem I have with dating
      Acts after the mid-60's is the fact that it never mentions Paul's martyrdom. I would think that
      such a momentous event would be the ideal wrap-up to such a story, and would provide the
      author with a nice occasion to sermonize a bit on the apostles' faithfulness, the status of the
      Christian movement as the apostles were passing off the scene, and all that. We have
      nothing even remotely along those lines; the book just ends abruptly with Paul living in
      Rome and doing his thing. This suggests to me that it was written while Paul was still living.

      But that's just me. I hope this isn't too off-topic from the main question about the long ending
      of Mark, I just wanted to chime in on this one point.

      Dave Washburn

      http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur

      Check out my Internet show: http://www.irvingsplace.us
    • Diana Fulbright
      Gethsemane – Γεθσημανη / Γεθσημανει is English transliteration of Greek transliteration of Hebrew / Aramaic גת שמנ שמנא –
      Message 38 of 38 , Sep 15, 2011
      • 0 Attachment

        GethsemaneΓεθσημανη / Γεθσημανει is English transliteration of Greek transliteration of Hebrew / Aramaic גת   שמנ \ שמנא Geth shemen – “oil press”.

         

        Diana Fulbright

         

        rom: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Johnny Hawkins
        Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 14:56
        To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [textualcriticism] Gethsemane


        Could someone tell me what language Gethsemane is. I thought it was Latin, but I checked several references and there is some contradiction.
        Thanks,
        Johnny

         



        --
        This message has been scanned for viruses and
        dangerous content by the globalweb.net MailScanner and is
        believed to be clean.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.