Alternative parallel re names.....Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 8:40 amHow can you say something of similar ?maryhelena wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 8:28 am
You cannot prove that the gospel literary figure of Joseph of Arimathea is Yosef ben Matityahu.
- Josef bar Matthea == Joseph bar Arimathea.
Titus Flavius Josephus - born Yosef ben Matityahu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigonus_II_Mattathias
One man taken down dead from the cross another man taken down alive from the cross......parallel?
- three crucifixions, one removed from the cross, both in Josephus and in Mark.
Josephus had a friend named Epaphroditus. Paul had a friend named Epaphroditus - so according to your above reasoning - Paul is Josephus......./
- Josephus, in secret league with a Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea a secret disciple of a Jesus
While parallelism are interesting they should not be taken out of context. If there are parallelisms in your 3 points they need to be viewed within their respective contexts. It's not a case of picking one context - the Jewish war of 70 c.e. as being some sort of primary parallel and the parallel of 30 - 33 c.e. as being a secondary parallel. Actually we are then not talking parallels but plagiarism. That way is not how to view parallels. Parallels need to be viewed in their individual context. Attempts to time-shift the relevance of a parallel outside of its context is to distort it's contextual relevance..
Really, the parallelisms are self-evident.
I invite you to think more and more on these parallelisms.
the NT, or the Midrash Philo, or Philo Paul. The issue for the student is not the abstraction but
the specific. Detailed study is the criterion, and the detailed study ought to respect the context
and not be limited to juxtaposing mere excerpts. Two passages may sound the same in
splendid isolation from their context, but when seen in context reflect difference rather than
similarity.
----
It would seem to me to follow that, in dealing with similarities we can sometimes discover
exact parallels, some with and some devoid of significance; seeming parallels which are so
only imperfectly; and statements which can be called parallels only by taking them out of
context. I must go on to allege that I encounter from time to time scholarly writings which go
astray in this last regard. It is the question of excerpt versus context, which I have touched on
and now return to.
Parallelomania*
Samuel Sandmel
https://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/pr ... el1961.pdf