Monday, June 2, 2014
RE MISSION TO THE GENTILES
Reviewing E P Sanders' The Historical Figure Of Jesus, especially Ch 12, the interesting thing, to me, which Sanders points out, contrary to what one would expect by casually reading the gospels, is, that it seems the historical Jesus and his followers during his life had no mission to gentiles whatsoever. See Sanders' account for references and arguments.
Tuesday, March 29, 2016
RE JESUS HISTORICAL FIGURE
I want to start some notes regarding connections between modern Jewish biblical scholarship and modern Christian biblical scholarship.
It seems to me that one can learn some things about the historical Jesus, which at least might turn out to be highly likely, by using modern Jewish biblical scholarship.
Unfortunately, I know nothing almost about Palestine history regarding those 400 years, 400 BCE and 4 CE, and very little about either Christian or Jewish biblical scholarship.
Further, it is almost too complicated for me to explain.
So what I suggest is that anyone interested in this subject first read R E Friedman, Who Wrote The Bible?, and only then read, and read it into, E P Sanders' account, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, and then draw what implications occur to you from first having read Friedman.
Someone out there may see what I mean here.
Certainly Sanders had been unwilling or unable to use the kind of material in Friedman's account to shed any light whatsoever on the historical Jesus. That fact, itself, may come as something of a shock.
It seems to me that one can learn some things about the historical Jesus, which at least might turn out to be highly likely, by using modern Jewish biblical scholarship.
Unfortunately, I know nothing almost about Palestine history regarding those 400 years, 400 BCE and 4 CE, and very little about either Christian or Jewish biblical scholarship.
Further, it is almost too complicated for me to explain.
So what I suggest is that anyone interested in this subject first read R E Friedman, Who Wrote The Bible?, and only then read, and read it into, E P Sanders' account, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, and then draw what implications occur to you from first having read Friedman.
Someone out there may see what I mean here.
Certainly Sanders had been unwilling or unable to use the kind of material in Friedman's account to shed any light whatsoever on the historical Jesus. That fact, itself, may come as something of a shock.
Saturday, March 26, 2016
OK I CANNOT KEEP A SECRET
See E P Sanders, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, "Jesus' Last Week".
Corpse impurity. It took a week to expunge....before Passover, and then Unleavened Bread.
Certainly Jesus and some or all of his disciples had it. Corpse impurity was everywhere.
Corpse impurity. It took a week to expunge....before Passover, and then Unleavened Bread.
Certainly Jesus and some or all of his disciples had it. Corpse impurity was everywhere.
Sunday, February 14, 2016
MILNER GROUP IDEOLOGICAL ORIGINS PERHAPS
One might call the utopianism of the Milner Group a late blooming manifestation of the radicalism of the real Whigs, which had infested the American colonies, as well as here and there in Britain and elsewhere, back in the early 18th century. See Bailyn's chapter "The Contagion Of Liberty", Ideological Origins.
It was a universalist radicalism born partly of fragmentation, a schismatic fragmentation, following in the train of the political and religious disasters of the Reformation and its aftermath, really.
"We hold these truths to be self evident..." Many radical schismatics, besides the colonists, were also universalists, Luther for example.
Jesus, oddly enough, although a radical Jewish schismatic, was not himself a universalist: he had no mission to the gentiles whatsoever. See: The New Testament Bible, and E P Sanders, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, Index, 'gentiles'.
Someone who knows more can correct me I am sure.
It was a universalist radicalism born partly of fragmentation, a schismatic fragmentation, following in the train of the political and religious disasters of the Reformation and its aftermath, really.
"We hold these truths to be self evident..." Many radical schismatics, besides the colonists, were also universalists, Luther for example.
Jesus, oddly enough, although a radical Jewish schismatic, was not himself a universalist: he had no mission to the gentiles whatsoever. See: The New Testament Bible, and E P Sanders, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, Index, 'gentiles'.
Someone who knows more can correct me I am sure.
, January 3, 2016
RE E P SANDERS THE HISTORICAL FIGURE
He seems to me to get the answer to the question, re reform or alternative society, wrong.
He leaves the question, of alternative sects, untouched.
He leaves the question, of alternative sects, untouched.
Friday, January 1, 2016
RE GREAT IMPROVISERS A TASTE FOR CHAOS
I have been reading Randy's book.
It has started me thinking along these lines myself.
Accordingly, although I am certainly not the first person to suggest this, I just want to say it here now.
Among great improvisers, even with the limited knowledge we have of details of his life and ministry, one can put Jesus' Ministry more or less at or near the top of a list of talented improvisers.
There are a lot of reasons for saying this. I don't want to go into a long list of them here.
Jesus was sort of a Luther of late Temple Judaism. He was dealt with by Caiaphas more or less in the way Luther would have been dealt, had the Vatican been able to lay hands on him without opposition.
One can read, for example, E P Sanders' book, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, to get some details on why I suggest this.
It has started me thinking along these lines myself.
Accordingly, although I am certainly not the first person to suggest this, I just want to say it here now.
Among great improvisers, even with the limited knowledge we have of details of his life and ministry, one can put Jesus' Ministry more or less at or near the top of a list of talented improvisers.
There are a lot of reasons for saying this. I don't want to go into a long list of them here.
Jesus was sort of a Luther of late Temple Judaism. He was dealt with by Caiaphas more or less in the way Luther would have been dealt, had the Vatican been able to lay hands on him without opposition.
One can read, for example, E P Sanders' book, The Historical Figure Of Jesus, to get some details on why I suggest this.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
ANOTHER KEY POINT RE WHO LOST HIS BUFFER THE CLASH WITHIN JUDAISM
The West, and its empires, lost, on their Western frontier, more than just their buffer, from us, the great despoiler of the western tradition.
Rather like Paul, within the Jewish tradition; the clash within, so to speak: Jesus had had no mission to the gentiles after all.
(Don't take my word for it: E P Sanders, The Historical Figure Of Jesus.) Paul, after Jesus, later, created one, clashed with the Jerusalem temple, and Jesus' brother even, over it.
W, W Wilson, (Paul):
"These principles are right for all people everywhere."
Monday, July 14, 2014
RE THE TEA PARTY TAXATION INDIANS TAX COLLECTORS RELIGION JESUS
Re Tea Party and Race, and comments, DK site:
He had a nice squibb here:
"...The story of which this is a part goes back to the 1930s and the New Deal. No region was hit harder by the Depression than the South, and Roosevelt probably saved thousands from starvation. His relief and agricultural programs, as well as the construction of infrastructure including the Tennessee Valley Authority, benefited millions. White Southern politicians tried to keep the benefits out of the hands of blacks, but they cold not entirely do so. Until 1937, FDR's economic help trumped his wife's open sympathy for the civil rights movement. But the 1936 elections threatened the South with a terrifying prospect. For the first time in about a century, as a I learned writing my last book, the Democratic Party won majorities in Congress that did not depend on southerners. The Negro vote (as it was then called) already played an important role in northern states, and the southerners feared that FDR's activism might draw on these majorities to overturn their social order. In 1937 they immediately joined the decimated Republicans to block FDR's court packing plan, and that signaled the end of Roosevelt's legislative juggernaut. A coalition of southern Democrats and conservative Republicans was strong enough to block effective civil rights legislation for a quarter of a century....." DK
Re such nonsense as 'no taxation without representation' arguments justifying the Boston Tea Party and Rebellion, etc., etc., the fact is that the colonists were among the most lightly taxed people, relatively speaking, in human history.
Furthermore, the practical difficulties of collecting either taxes or duties from the colonists was well documented, even back then. The British mostly ignored the problem, although the rhetoric was bitter.
Professor Allison, Teaching Company, "Before 1776", has some enjoyable lectures on these topics. See especially his illustration on the Crown agent's difficulties collecting duty on a sugar shipment.
WHY NOT ALSO THROW IN RELIGION, TO RACE AND REPRESENTATION ISSUES?
For comparison, take a look at Roman taxes on, say, Judea.
Interestingly, Jesus was a friend of any number of tax gatherers for Rome. It is all over the gospels.
See for example, the accounts in E P Sanders, The Historical Figure Of Jesus.
He had a nice squibb here:
"...The story of which this is a part goes back to the 1930s and the New Deal. No region was hit harder by the Depression than the South, and Roosevelt probably saved thousands from starvation. His relief and agricultural programs, as well as the construction of infrastructure including the Tennessee Valley Authority, benefited millions. White Southern politicians tried to keep the benefits out of the hands of blacks, but they cold not entirely do so. Until 1937, FDR's economic help trumped his wife's open sympathy for the civil rights movement. But the 1936 elections threatened the South with a terrifying prospect. For the first time in about a century, as a I learned writing my last book, the Democratic Party won majorities in Congress that did not depend on southerners. The Negro vote (as it was then called) already played an important role in northern states, and the southerners feared that FDR's activism might draw on these majorities to overturn their social order. In 1937 they immediately joined the decimated Republicans to block FDR's court packing plan, and that signaled the end of Roosevelt's legislative juggernaut. A coalition of southern Democrats and conservative Republicans was strong enough to block effective civil rights legislation for a quarter of a century....." DK
Re such nonsense as 'no taxation without representation' arguments justifying the Boston Tea Party and Rebellion, etc., etc., the fact is that the colonists were among the most lightly taxed people, relatively speaking, in human history.
Furthermore, the practical difficulties of collecting either taxes or duties from the colonists was well documented, even back then. The British mostly ignored the problem, although the rhetoric was bitter.
Professor Allison, Teaching Company, "Before 1776", has some enjoyable lectures on these topics. See especially his illustration on the Crown agent's difficulties collecting duty on a sugar shipment.
WHY NOT ALSO THROW IN RELIGION, TO RACE AND REPRESENTATION ISSUES?
For comparison, take a look at Roman taxes on, say, Judea.
Interestingly, Jesus was a friend of any number of tax gatherers for Rome. It is all over the gospels.
See for example, the accounts in E P Sanders, The Historical Figure Of Jesus.
No comments:
Post a Comment