Search found 95 matches

by Ken Olson
Wed May 23, 2018 4:20 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: The Semitic background of Matthew 23.26 = Luke 11.41.
Replies: 18
Views: 1810

Re: The Semitic background of Matthew 23.26 = Luke 11.41.

I'm sorry I'm way behind in my responses. Looks like I'm never going to have time to write a thorough response to this, so I'll give a brief one. Way back on March 14, Ben Smith wrote: I have a possibly impertinent question for you. I know you espouse the Farrer theory of synoptic relationships. Do ...
by Ken Olson
Tue May 08, 2018 9:21 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Josephus on James the Just?
Replies: 20
Views: 1446

Re: Josephus on James the Just?

Tree of Life wrote: The so called/called text applies to brother and when correctly rendered Ant. Bk 20 Ch 9:1 is read: 'James, the so called brother of Jesus Christ/Messiah.' Let’s look at the Greek of Ant. 20.200: τὸν ἀδελφὸν Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ, Ἰάκωβος ὄνομα αὐτῷ the brother (of) Jesus t...
by Ken Olson
Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:59 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: James 1.1 and 2.1.
Replies: 139
Views: 8080

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Liberty or freedom (eleutheria) is not an especially common word in the NT ... When Paul uses it, he seems to mean especially freedom from the Mosaic law, for example in his account of the Antioch incident, in which the “circumcision faction” apparently discovered that Jews were eating with uncircu...
by Ken Olson
Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:45 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: James 1.1 and 2.1.
Replies: 139
Views: 8080

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Ben How do you understand these two verses from James? 1.25 But those who look into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and persevere, being not hearers who forget but doers who act—they will be blessed in their doing. 2.12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. Is...
by Ken Olson
Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:18 pm
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: James 1.1 and 2.1.
Replies: 139
Views: 8080

Re: James 1.1 and 2.1.

Ben Smith wrote: My thesis will be that the epistle originally lacked any reference at all to Jesus and that its author was not a Christian by my definition (see below), but was rather a putative member of the kind of sectarian Jewish group from which Christianity originally emerged. James strikes m...
by Ken Olson
Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:05 pm
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Let the reader understand... Again
Replies: 147
Views: 14346

Re: Let the reader understand... Again

John2 wrote: I don't get that impression from Mk. 13:12-13 but I suppose it is possible. To me it sounds more like what Josephus says about the Fourth Philosophic climate in Ant. 18.1.1 and War 2.13.3: ... there were also very great robberies and murder of our principal men ... murders of men, which...
by Ken Olson
Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:25 pm
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Let the reader understand... Again
Replies: 147
Views: 14346

Re: Let the reader understand... Again

Neil Godfrey wrote: Just for the record, Ernst Haenchen (apparently Ken's source) acknowledges that these events were taking place as early as Paul's own missionary activity (pp.441f). Neil, when you say "these events" did you mean to include Mark 13.-12-13 and 14-20, about Roman officials putting C...
by Ken Olson
Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:36 pm
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Let the reader understand... Again
Replies: 147
Views: 14346

Re: Let the reader understand... Again

John2 wrote: I gather you see these official proceedings as taking place after 70 CE, and while I do think Mark was written c. 70 CE, the context of Mk. 13 is presented as being Jesus' words pre-70 CE. And I find what Jesus says in Mk. 13 lines up well with what Josephus says about the lead up to an...
by Ken Olson
Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:48 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: The Semitic background of Matthew 23.26 = Luke 11.41.
Replies: 18
Views: 1810

Re: The Semitic background of Matthew 23.26 = Luke 11.41.

Ben Smith wrote: In other words, with the translational hypothesis, everything is explained: both the garbling and the difference between Matthew and Luke, conveniently dependent upon a common word in Aramaic. With the editing hypothesis, however (Luke editing Matthew), one is left wondering why Luk...
by Ken Olson
Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:35 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: The Semitic background of Matthew 23.26 = Luke 11.41.
Replies: 18
Views: 1810

Re: The Semitic background of Matthew 23.26 = Luke 11.41.

Ben Smith wrote: What I wonder is whether your explanation adequately covers the wording of Luke's admonition: "But give the things within as alms" (πλὴν τὰ ἐνόντα δότε ἐλεημοσύνην). What does that mean, to give "the things within" as alms? The motif of inside and outside works fairly well in Matthe...